Almost everyone knows that Microsoft has had a monopoly in Operating Systems for quite a while, starting with dominance in DOS, extended in Windows 3.x, and nailed down with Windows 95 and NT. None of this was accomplished by having the best product, or in many cases, even a good product. Microsoft has monopolized the OS market on the basis of misinformation, dirty tricks, financial leverage and secret contracts.
Most people have heard about this, but few know just how seriously those actions have affected the software market, nor how many competitors have been destroyed. Having been in the PC market from 1981 on, I had personal experience with several Microsoft tactics, starting with DOS, then DesQview and moving on to OS/2. Other people I was in contact with told me additional stories in the same vein, totalling maybe a dozen. But even I had no real understanding of just how much of this went on to establish and protect Microsoft's monopoly.
Until March 4th, yesterday as I write this. I followed a link from a news source to Automation Access, a firm in California. On this site is a compilation of data on Microsoft behavior that shows a pattern from their very start that involves deception, using other peoples IP without permission, late delivery of software that is far from workable, and treating customers and partners as disposable cash or software sources.
Based on my personal experience and the additional information I have received, my concern about Microsoft's tactics has greatly increased. If the past is prologue, then the future holds serious dangers for all of us, individuals and companies alike. The evidence for this is overwhelming when you can see most of it in one place.
The best single document I have seen is named 2003 and Beyond. In one place this excellent writer, Andrew Grygus, has provided sufficient detail to convince most people that Microsoft will eventually force you into a rental model. Rental means your programs and data reside on their servers, and if you miss a payment or Microsoft's systems have a glitch, your access could be instantly cut off. Based on past experience with their OS reliability and virus vulnerability, this is indeed a frightening prospect.
Just as impressive as the text document is the attached list of Additional Reading, numbering more than a hundred external references to supporting documents. I have read selected external references and most of the site's information, taking several hours to absorb the broad and deep information there.
Not content with simply telling you about the problem, Andrew Grygus also lays out the case for using technology well with a roadmap for Building Your Business System. Andrew also looks at where information technology is heading and its relevance to your business.
He then provides a view of alternatives such as Linux and Should Your Business Use Linux, which includes explaining the circumstances where your company might be able to use these alternatives.
Microsoft wants and plans to be the sole supplier of software to everyone. They want it all, and are proceeding on plan to lure you into a dependency where there will be no financially feasible escape. Once you check into dot net, you won't check out.
The first step in locking you to Microsft has already been taken. Windows 2000 has limitations unless all the systems on that network are running W2K or later software. Sure you can use older versions of Windows, but the full functionality won't be there. It also forces companies to transition to Active Directory (AD), putting all your user and security information in one place for your convenience, and for Microsoft's.
Microsoft's next step is dot net. This is not the information net they talk about, it's the hidden net in their trap. Once in, you're netted for good. The plan for dot net is to move all information, all files, formats, etc. into a proprietary database known as WinFS. Once that happens, access to all of your data becomes totally dependent on Microsoft's system reliability and your complete compliance with all Microsoft requirements.
Once you are fully in dot net, you will probably be beyond the point of financially feasible extraction. Microsoft will own the keys to your data. The step after that will be to a rental model, but it may already be too late to escape by the time you've been dot netted. Then rentals will go up just enough to keep Microsoft's income expanding at its expected 20% annual rate. This will become very expensive.
Meanwhile, Big Brother, I mean Microsoft, is keeping an eye on you, your company and its secrets. And he has the power switch to your company's software in his hand.
Windows XP was the first step in that plan. With that, under Microsoft's EULA, they can enter your XP computers, even turn them on remotely, scan your disks, make updates, access any information they want, turn off or disable software without any legal liability. If you run Windows 2000 and have added SP3, that capability was also added to SP3's EULA.
They will use these capabilities to monitor your compliance with all of their rules and requirements. Any violation, late payment, accidental oversight could disable your access to the whole computer network until fixed. You're out of business until then.
Not content with tricking you into giving them full access to your company's files, Microsoft is also strongly supporting the effort to get UCITA (Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act) passed in all states. It's done in Maryland and Virginia, but is being resisted strongly elsewhere.
Just how bad is this? Read the whole thing at the above link, but here's a quote to give you the flavor:
"UCITA essentially removes all rights a software purchaser may have (or imagine s/he has). All rights are given to the software company, including the right to invade your computer systems remotely and remove, modify or disable software you are running for any reason they may have or imagine they have. You have no legal right to protest or appeal these actions."
It's much worse than that - you must read the full list of things it prohibits. It's a clear example that enough money and lobbying can get any kind of bad law passed.
The best way to escape is not to go there in the first place. The reported uptake of Windows XP is below Microsoft's expectations, leading me to believe that many companies are wary of their invasive EULA. IBM reportedly will not attach a Windows 2000 or XP system to any of their production networks. They probably have a good reason for this.
If you already have Windows 2000 and/or XP, there is still time to pull out without having to duplicate your entire IT infrastructure. If all you have is Windows 2000 and no SP3, don't install SP3 and start investigating your options with other IT sources. Don't worry - there are a number of high quality alternatives that support open systems and open software listed in the Summary section.
Dot net still isn't a production system, but the beta of Longhorn is the camel's dot net nose in your tent. The next step - starting to use dot net in production is the most critical point in your devolution into a Microsoft money source. Now is the time to step back and take a look at where your company will be in three years if you become a dot net serf.
Here are some questions to consider:
Let's consider a scenario where your company sees more to gain than lose by implementing dot net. Perhaps you've been convinced that the advertised benefits of a "Tightly Integrated" company are where you want to go. Remember, these are advertisements by a convicted monopolist. What will it cost to get there?
First, consider conversion costs to dot net. All your custom software has to be modified and recompiled to run under dot net. This will be costly and the result will run on Microsoft systems (and only Microsoft systems) which are still being designed, never mind in production and the bugs worked out. The early adopters will help Microsoft debug their operating systems and software, and pay for the privalege.
Second, consider the probable direction of prices for these new systems. There will be incentives no doubt, free stuff and discounts to make the economics look better in the early days. But what about later?
Third, consider the new hardware and software required to support this move. Developers will require dot net development software, operations will require new and faster servers, PCs will be required to upgrade to Windows 2000 or XP, which will require new hardware in most cases. Networks may have to be upgraded for higher traffic levels because the core theorem of dot net is that all systems will keep each other updated.
Fourth, consider the costs versus benefits. Benefits are being advertised in non-quantified ways that are very attractive to executives who never have to see the underbelly of the beast. How do you quantify those proposed benefits? Suppose your current system can provide answers in one hour. How much $$ benefit is there to cutting this down to 15 minutes? To one minute?
Can you make better decisions based on information that is one minute old? If so, how much do you gain or save by that, in $$? This is a critical issue. Most people will assume that faster is better, and it often is if you ignore costs. But there is no benefit to a system which makes you $10 while costing $15 and takes years to arrive. You won't make it up on volume either.
Once hooked by dot net, getting out will be an expensive long term project and Microsoft will fight you every step of the way with intimidation, incentives to stay, forecasts of more benefits that you didn't get with the current version and the reminder of incompatibility with your customers and suppliers.
You won't escape without strong reasons, big budgets and lots of courage in the executive suite. The toughest thing to realize today is that since Windows 2000 SP3, Microsoft can now check your every system remotely. They can detect any non-Microsoft system on the net and respond by turning software off, shutting your business down, or increasing prices for a mixed network.
In order to avoid detection, your company will be forced to build an entirely separate network and systems not connected to the Microsoft infected network anywhere. This will cost you between 25% and 100%+ of your current hardware budget, much of it at the start. To this add software conversion costs and data conversion costs assuming that Microsoft will let you have your data back in a useful form outside their control.
There are good software alternatives outside Microsoft that can accomplish the same things that Microsoft promises, probably sooner and at lower cost. Best of all, you won't be spied on, forced into upgrades or locked into one supplier. In other words, avoiding the dot net trap can give you the benefits and keep future options open. Here are the main players:
For $25 to $500 million companies, keep in mind these major IT industry companies have built support structures for SMB (Small & Medium sized business) through their afilliates and partners. For even smaller companies, there are many small business suppliers, even in towns under 20,000 population. When you check them out, compare with others such as Automation Access, which I consider a good model for small business suppliers.
Microsoft's new Small Business Unit will be going after the most vulnerable business class, businesses under 500 people. Companies this size are rarely able to spend the time checking out security and pitfalls of doing business with Microsoft. Microsoft touts Windows XP as protection from viruses and hackers. They offer tips for using Outlook, the Microsoft virus accelerator, but don't specify who is going to protect you from Microsoft.
Microsoft is a monopolist convicted on eight counts of antitrust violations involving misinformation, contract abuses, illegal bundling of software and many other illegal acts. Even after repeated convictions and gagged out of court settlements, Microsoft continues to act like they did before the conviction. Being convicted of monopoly abuse has had no real effect on their behavior.
There is a bigger threat to businesses than being unable to trust Microsoft's word. Having been found guilty of antitrust violations, Microsoft now faces hundreds of lawsuits for damages. These suits do not need to prove guilt - that is already proven. All these suits must do is show harm was done and ask for triple damages. Based on the number of suits likely to prevail, many with triple damages, Microsoft's $43 billion cash horde looks like thin coverage.
Another Microsoft vulnerability, well hidden, is their excessive use of stock options and accounting methods that have more than raised eyebrows. I won't attempt to explain this, but simply point you to Bill Parish's summary, the person who first discovered this. Briefly, if options holders lose confidence that their options will be worth keeping and bail out, the Microsoft stock price will be hit with side effects that could be disasterous.
There are more than twenty other challenges for Microsoft you can read at Nightmares for Microsoft.
If you continue to trust Microsoft and buy into their dot net, then later find out your business is losing ground to others who didn't go that route, the board of directors and the executives of the company could be found liable for negligence or failure to perform due dilligence and sued for stockholder losses. Given the last few years of publicised executive greed and theft, people will not be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.
If for no other reason than to protect themselves, executives must investigate Microsoft's plan in detail and decide at least what backup plans to put in place. Failure to do this carefully and at the highest level is likely to be a career or corporation limiting experience.
Even though leaving the Microsoft umbrella may seem expensive, remaining under it will become more expensive. But if your competitors go away from Microsoft and you remain, they will gain an advantage over you based on cost, reliability and performance. The escape road, if chosen then, will require an additional major expense at the worst possible time.
All content on this site is Copyright 2001
- 2003 by Bill Nicholls
All Rights Reserved