213 thoughts on “Is Microsoft innovative? Dave Winer and I argue it out

  1. Does Microsoft does innovate? I would say yes. Stan mentioned several examples of innovation at Micrososft…

    XNA
    Photosynth
    Office 2007 UI
    Intellisense
    ClearType
    OneNote

    However, for the most part, Microsoft is currently playing catch by copying or extending existing innovations – and usually does a poor job in the process.

    In addition, Microsoft tends to release products before they are really viable in the market. Examples? Media Center Extenders and tablet computing. Both of these products technically work as advertised, but lack major adoption due to market, technology or usability issues that had yet to be resolved.

    True innovation is not just developing something new, but refining and timing it’s release so it is truly successful in the market.

  2. Does Microsoft does innovate? I would say yes. Stan mentioned several examples of innovation at Micrososft…

    XNA
    Photosynth
    Office 2007 UI
    Intellisense
    ClearType
    OneNote

    However, for the most part, Microsoft is currently playing catch by copying or extending existing innovations – and usually does a poor job in the process.

    In addition, Microsoft tends to release products before they are really viable in the market. Examples? Media Center Extenders and tablet computing. Both of these products technically work as advertised, but lack major adoption due to market, technology or usability issues that had yet to be resolved.

    True innovation is not just developing something new, but refining and timing it’s release so it is truly successful in the market.

  3. There’s a lot of talk/speculation/hype around Apple releasing the “iPhone” in January. Excuse me, but isn’t this just a phone that plays music? By my research, Microsoft has been doing this since 2002 with their Windows Mobile Smartphone software. I’ve had a Smartphone since 2003 and have been able to play music as well as videos. I definitely call that innovative.

    When Jobs releases the iPhone, it will be interesting to hear how he spins it and what outlandish claims he’ll make. My prediction is that he’ll ignore all facts and claim that this is the first time it has ever been done.

    Sometimes I think their greatest at being innovative with stats, specs, marketing and claims of first ever things.

  4. There’s a lot of talk/speculation/hype around Apple releasing the “iPhone” in January. Excuse me, but isn’t this just a phone that plays music? By my research, Microsoft has been doing this since 2002 with their Windows Mobile Smartphone software. I’ve had a Smartphone since 2003 and have been able to play music as well as videos. I definitely call that innovative.

    When Jobs releases the iPhone, it will be interesting to hear how he spins it and what outlandish claims he’ll make. My prediction is that he’ll ignore all facts and claim that this is the first time it has ever been done.

    Sometimes I think their greatest at being innovative with stats, specs, marketing and claims of first ever things.

  5. @93 – Its a nice set of crieterea that you apply for ‘innovation’. Unfortunately that seems to apply only for microsoft. Take a look at my comments @66 which pretty much say the same thing.

    You were contending that things like innovations were not really innovations because they were *eroding* some skill. At that point you didnt say that they didnt benefit users. But @93 you are talking about innovations as benefitting users. I agree – innovations should benefit users.

    Now as per this criterea – when was the last time an widely used useful technology came out of open source? So Stan’s contention that open source is not innovative is validated by your argument. While its a great romantic idea, unfortunately any innovation has come only from closed propreitery orgs and not from open source.

    @98 – So what if Dave Winer swicthed from Windows to Mac?

    reg MSFT being too big to do anything meaningful – Its so surprising people often talk about this without having a real knowledge on how MSFT operates. Talk to any ex/current Microsoftie and see how independent the individual divisions operate inside. (Robert Scoble would agree with this.)

    @103 – Are you saying that in spite of desperate attempts to write a linux virus nobody has succeeded? Linux is that ‘bullet proof’?
    Besides, its more meaningful for a virus writer to target client OS. Servers are much more secure and tight. And they dont have malware downloads frrom the net every other day by unsuspecting users.

  6. @93 – Its a nice set of crieterea that you apply for ‘innovation’. Unfortunately that seems to apply only for microsoft. Take a look at my comments @66 which pretty much say the same thing.

    You were contending that things like innovations were not really innovations because they were *eroding* some skill. At that point you didnt say that they didnt benefit users. But @93 you are talking about innovations as benefitting users. I agree – innovations should benefit users.

    Now as per this criterea – when was the last time an widely used useful technology came out of open source? So Stan’s contention that open source is not innovative is validated by your argument. While its a great romantic idea, unfortunately any innovation has come only from closed propreitery orgs and not from open source.

    @98 – So what if Dave Winer swicthed from Windows to Mac?

    reg MSFT being too big to do anything meaningful – Its so surprising people often talk about this without having a real knowledge on how MSFT operates. Talk to any ex/current Microsoftie and see how independent the individual divisions operate inside. (Robert Scoble would agree with this.)

    @103 – Are you saying that in spite of desperate attempts to write a linux virus nobody has succeeded? Linux is that ‘bullet proof’?
    Besides, its more meaningful for a virus writer to target client OS. Servers are much more secure and tight. And they dont have malware downloads frrom the net every other day by unsuspecting users.

  7. @102: That old chestnut! Let’s imagine a scenario where there were more Linux / OSS systems and ‘power users’ then shall we?

    OK… I’m thinking ‘web servers’. Are you? Excellent. So by that argument, could we then say that most servers compromised by viruses / malware (worms?) would be Linux servers? I think the stats show otherwise…

    Besides all that: ignoring the ‘exposure’ do you honestly believe that people aren’t trying desperately to be the writer of the *first* dangerously harmful Linux virus? Of course they are!!

  8. @102: That old chestnut! Let’s imagine a scenario where there were more Linux / OSS systems and ‘power users’ then shall we?

    OK… I’m thinking ‘web servers’. Are you? Excellent. So by that argument, could we then say that most servers compromised by viruses / malware (worms?) would be Linux servers? I think the stats show otherwise…

    Besides all that: ignoring the ‘exposure’ do you honestly believe that people aren’t trying desperately to be the writer of the *first* dangerously harmful Linux virus? Of course they are!!

  9. @ MGB, How the hell do you know how secure Linux, OS X, FreeBSD, NetBSD, BeOS would be if they had the user base that windows does? Virus/Malware writers target the masses and users taht have little knowledge of how computers work. These OSs have neither the massive user base that windows does or the ignorant users that script-kiddies rely on.

    There’s no shortage of security vulnerabilities when it comes to open source software. Take a look on http://secunia.com/ and count up the number of advisories relating to open source software.

  10. @ MGB, How the hell do you know how secure Linux, OS X, FreeBSD, NetBSD, BeOS would be if they had the user base that windows does? Virus/Malware writers target the masses and users taht have little knowledge of how computers work. These OSs have neither the massive user base that windows does or the ignorant users that script-kiddies rely on.

    There’s no shortage of security vulnerabilities when it comes to open source software. Take a look on http://secunia.com/ and count up the number of advisories relating to open source software.

  11. “I’m not sure why MS bashers are so desperate to dispute MS’s innovations. It’s not like open source has done anything innovative.”

    I was not bashing Microsoft innovations. Just disputing those that were attributed to Microsoft when they clearly should not be.

Comments are closed.