I wish more people understood that this is how the events unfolded.
MS was quite prescient in deciding to abusing its monopoly in order to put Netscape out of business. Browsers did, and still do, represent the biggest threat to Microsoft's Windows/Office dominance. If Microsoft hadn't succeeded in de-standardizing the web, choice of OS would have become largely irrelevant. Their abuse of monopoly powers set back web standardization by at least a decade.
This was an absolutely pivotal turn of events in the computing industry. It has had a large hand in defining the computing landscape for the past decade, and perhaps even the next decade. It really was that significant.
I don't think they were especially prescient. They were just doing that paranoid thing they do, which is to eliminate any competitive threat, real or imagined, current or future, before it can become a competitive threat. As I pointed out above, they tried the same stunt with Java. Platform neutral Java was a much bigger potential threat to Windows than Netscape, I'd argue. The idea that the browser could be the platform is only now beginning to have some reality to it. But 15 years ago, it was just barely a theory. That didn't matter to Microsoft.
Not entirely. The continued development of Office for the Mac was part of the deal Apple made with Microsoft to avoid a long court battle, which involved that, the "investment," a technology sharing arrangement, the MSIE install agreement, and many thought at the time, probably some cash behind the scenes. We don't know if Microsoft would have continued Office development for the Mac had all the rest not occurred. It was all packaged up in one big announcement.
My point was that the continued development of Office for the Mac saved the Mac platform, and the (potential) investment of cash did not. While your response was an interesting dive into what all was involved with that deal, it did not refute that point.
My point was that the continued development of Office for the Mac saved the Mac platform, and the (potential) investment of cash did not. While your response was an interesting dive into what all was involved with that deal, it did not refute that point.
Trying to remember what this discussion was about...
I'd respond that no single thing saved the Mac. As far as Office is concerned, Microsoft was already committed to the next version at the time the announcement was made, so at most, Microsoft's commitment was to one more version beyond that one (which turned out to be Office X). A lot of things happened at Apple between 1997 and 2001 to save the Mac platform.
I wish more people understood that this is how the events unfolded.
MS was quite prescient in deciding to abusing its monopoly in order to put Netscape out of business. Browsers did, and still do, represent the biggest threat to Microsoft's Windows/Office dominance. If Microsoft hadn't succeeded in de-standardizing the web, choice of OS would have become largely irrelevant. Their abuse of monopoly powers set back web standardization by at least a decade.
This was an absolutely pivotal turn of events in the computing industry. It has had a large hand in defining the computing landscape for the past decade, and perhaps even the next decade. It really was that significant.
Please. Netscape killed itself. They started charging for their browser starting at 1.0 and eventually IE stopped sucking and Navigator started sucking badly at 4.0.
Besides they were equally guilty with their own non-standard extensions. They both de-standardized the web and netscape was the FIRST guilty party because they wanted browser dominance.
And in 2009 not even Google Docs is as good as Office. The browser was no real threat to Windows/Office dominance any more than Java was and it had nothing to do with MS. Constellation was a freaking joke in 1995 and cloud services so-so even 15 years later.
"That is why the they bailed them out financially years ago."
Sorry, "phal," but Microsoft did no such thing. When little Billy G's company sent $150 million to Apple "years ago," it was to keep himself and his company out of jail! Microsoft (via one of its supposed "subcontractors) was caught red-handed stealing the code from QuickTime to make its own media support system. Yes, STEALING THE CODE. Gotcha!
The settlement of this matter, accomplished out of court, was the transfer of funds you allude to, above. Believe me, there is no love lost between Microsoft and ANY of its present or former competitors: not Netscape, not Word Perfect, not anybody.
Do NOT delude your self into believing that Microsoft bailed out Apple. Didn't happen. They bailed THEMSELVES out of just one more in a long list of ethical (not to say CRIMINAL) activities here and around the world.
Many things were at play back then. Apple needed a shot in the arm to keep afloat, Apple needed Microsoft to continue making Office and IE for the mac, to keep people from fleeing Apple in its darkest hour. Microsoft had infringed on some patents and Apple namely Jobs made a phone call to Bill Gates cutting a deal that would help band aid Apple for a few years until Apple could get securely back on its feet. This phone call and story put Jobs on the front cover of TIME magazine and is now seen as amazing folklore about Steve Jobs and the silicone valley company.
This was stopgap so Apple could refocus the company while getting some support from a major software player which at the time many were leaving in droves. Analysts were counting down the months that Apple had left to stay in business. Yes that's how bad it was at one point.
I think I remember the iconic Jobs being quoted as saying to Bill Gates, "the world is a better place (with Apple), thank you." about the deal that helped Apple sustain itself.
Trying to remember what this discussion was about...
I'd respond that no single thing saved the Mac. As far as Office is concerned, Microsoft was already committed to the next version at the time the announcement was made, so at most, Microsoft's commitment was to one more version beyond that one (which turned out to be Office X). A lot of things happened at Apple between 1997 and 2001 to save the Mac platform.
Let's just agree on this: that Microsoft's recommitment to Office on Mac was a NECESSARY condition for saving the platform, but it may not have been sufficient all by itself. In that case, we are BOTH right. At the time, the Mac would have been doomed without Office, but it also took a lot of other great moves by Apple (e.g. the iMac) to save it too.
Also: my memory differs from yours with respect to timing between announcement of the deal and commitment to Office for Mac. In other words, I am quite sure (because I was paying close attention to all things Mac even back then) that the information about Office for Mac and the deal we are discussing were revealed simultaneously.
I wish more people understood that this is how the events unfolded.
MS was quite prescient in deciding to abusing its monopoly in order to put Netscape out of business. Browsers did, and still do, represent the biggest threat to Microsoft's Windows/Office dominance. If Microsoft hadn't succeeded in de-standardizing the web, choice of OS would have become largely irrelevant. Their abuse of monopoly powers set back web standardization by at least a decade.
This was an absolutely pivotal turn of events in the computing industry. It has had a large hand in defining the computing landscape for the past decade, and perhaps even the next decade. It really was that significant.
Agreed, and they pulled the same stunt with Sun's open source Java. They highjacked it too and began adding proprietary stuff to it that only worked with Internet Explorer.
In both cases (HTML and Java) we are still paying the price of the fractionation that was caused.
Let's just agree on this: that Microsoft's recommitment to Office on Mac was a NECESSARY condition for saving the platform, but it may not have been sufficient all by itself. In that case, we are BOTH right. At the time, the Mac would have been doomed without Office, but it also took a lot of other great moves by Apple (e.g. the iMac) to save it too.
Also: my memory differs from yours with respect to timing between announcement of the deal and commitment to Office for Mac. In other words, I am quite sure (because I was paying close attention to all things Mac even back then) that the information about Office for Mac and the deal we are discussing were revealed simultaneously.
Thompson
My point was the announcement was of more symbolic than substantive value, since Microsoft was already committed to the next version of Office before the announcement was made. By the time the next version of Office was released in 2001, Apple had made other strides in recovering from their tailspin, which could well have induced Microsoft to continue developing Office for the Mac without the 1997 deal. Don't get me wrong, the politics were important. I just question how much difference it made in what Microsoft actually did in terms of developing Office for the Mac.
I don't think our memories differ. The $150 million investment, the technology sharing agreement, the MSIE and Office deal -- all were announced at the same time. Did I ever imply otherwise? If, I didn't mean to.
The other thing to remember with this deal was that Microsoft was still in the throes of building the Office brand into the ubiquitous product we know today. The fact that there was a Mac version of Office at that time helped cement Microsoft's market position -- even people who would never imagine themselves using a Mac believed that the Mac version made their purchase of the Windows version of Office "safer" because it was in the process of becoming the de facto productivity suite.
Nobody wanted to be buying the next WordStar-type product (regardless of the merits)...
Comments
I wish more people understood that this is how the events unfolded.
MS was quite prescient in deciding to abusing its monopoly in order to put Netscape out of business. Browsers did, and still do, represent the biggest threat to Microsoft's Windows/Office dominance. If Microsoft hadn't succeeded in de-standardizing the web, choice of OS would have become largely irrelevant. Their abuse of monopoly powers set back web standardization by at least a decade.
This was an absolutely pivotal turn of events in the computing industry. It has had a large hand in defining the computing landscape for the past decade, and perhaps even the next decade. It really was that significant.
I don't think they were especially prescient. They were just doing that paranoid thing they do, which is to eliminate any competitive threat, real or imagined, current or future, before it can become a competitive threat. As I pointed out above, they tried the same stunt with Java. Platform neutral Java was a much bigger potential threat to Windows than Netscape, I'd argue. The idea that the browser could be the platform is only now beginning to have some reality to it. But 15 years ago, it was just barely a theory. That didn't matter to Microsoft.
Not entirely. The continued development of Office for the Mac was part of the deal Apple made with Microsoft to avoid a long court battle, which involved that, the "investment," a technology sharing arrangement, the MSIE install agreement, and many thought at the time, probably some cash behind the scenes. We don't know if Microsoft would have continued Office development for the Mac had all the rest not occurred. It was all packaged up in one big announcement.
My point was that the continued development of Office for the Mac saved the Mac platform, and the (potential) investment of cash did not. While your response was an interesting dive into what all was involved with that deal, it did not refute that point.
Thompson
My point was that the continued development of Office for the Mac saved the Mac platform, and the (potential) investment of cash did not. While your response was an interesting dive into what all was involved with that deal, it did not refute that point.
Trying to remember what this discussion was about...
I'd respond that no single thing saved the Mac. As far as Office is concerned, Microsoft was already committed to the next version at the time the announcement was made, so at most, Microsoft's commitment was to one more version beyond that one (which turned out to be Office X). A lot of things happened at Apple between 1997 and 2001 to save the Mac platform.
I wish more people understood that this is how the events unfolded.
MS was quite prescient in deciding to abusing its monopoly in order to put Netscape out of business. Browsers did, and still do, represent the biggest threat to Microsoft's Windows/Office dominance. If Microsoft hadn't succeeded in de-standardizing the web, choice of OS would have become largely irrelevant. Their abuse of monopoly powers set back web standardization by at least a decade.
This was an absolutely pivotal turn of events in the computing industry. It has had a large hand in defining the computing landscape for the past decade, and perhaps even the next decade. It really was that significant.
Please. Netscape killed itself. They started charging for their browser starting at 1.0 and eventually IE stopped sucking and Navigator started sucking badly at 4.0.
Besides they were equally guilty with their own non-standard extensions. They both de-standardized the web and netscape was the FIRST guilty party because they wanted browser dominance.
And in 2009 not even Google Docs is as good as Office. The browser was no real threat to Windows/Office dominance any more than Java was and it had nothing to do with MS. Constellation was a freaking joke in 1995 and cloud services so-so even 15 years later.
@phalanx,
"That is why the they bailed them out financially years ago."
Sorry, "phal," but Microsoft did no such thing. When little Billy G's company sent $150 million to Apple "years ago," it was to keep himself and his company out of jail! Microsoft (via one of its supposed "subcontractors) was caught red-handed stealing the code from QuickTime to make its own media support system. Yes, STEALING THE CODE. Gotcha!
The settlement of this matter, accomplished out of court, was the transfer of funds you allude to, above. Believe me, there is no love lost between Microsoft and ANY of its present or former competitors: not Netscape, not Word Perfect, not anybody.
Do NOT delude your self into believing that Microsoft bailed out Apple. Didn't happen. They bailed THEMSELVES out of just one more in a long list of ethical (not to say CRIMINAL) activities here and around the world.
Many things were at play back then. Apple needed a shot in the arm to keep afloat, Apple needed Microsoft to continue making Office and IE for the mac, to keep people from fleeing Apple in its darkest hour. Microsoft had infringed on some patents and Apple namely Jobs made a phone call to Bill Gates cutting a deal that would help band aid Apple for a few years until Apple could get securely back on its feet. This phone call and story put Jobs on the front cover of TIME magazine and is now seen as amazing folklore about Steve Jobs and the silicone valley company.
This was stopgap so Apple could refocus the company while getting some support from a major software player which at the time many were leaving in droves. Analysts were counting down the months that Apple had left to stay in business. Yes that's how bad it was at one point.
I think I remember the iconic Jobs being quoted as saying to Bill Gates, "the world is a better place (with Apple), thank you." about the deal that helped Apple sustain itself.
Trying to remember what this discussion was about...
I'd respond that no single thing saved the Mac. As far as Office is concerned, Microsoft was already committed to the next version at the time the announcement was made, so at most, Microsoft's commitment was to one more version beyond that one (which turned out to be Office X). A lot of things happened at Apple between 1997 and 2001 to save the Mac platform.
Let's just agree on this: that Microsoft's recommitment to Office on Mac was a NECESSARY condition for saving the platform, but it may not have been sufficient all by itself. In that case, we are BOTH right. At the time, the Mac would have been doomed without Office, but it also took a lot of other great moves by Apple (e.g. the iMac) to save it too.
Also: my memory differs from yours with respect to timing between announcement of the deal and commitment to Office for Mac. In other words, I am quite sure (because I was paying close attention to all things Mac even back then) that the information about Office for Mac and the deal we are discussing were revealed simultaneously.
Thompson
I wish more people understood that this is how the events unfolded.
MS was quite prescient in deciding to abusing its monopoly in order to put Netscape out of business. Browsers did, and still do, represent the biggest threat to Microsoft's Windows/Office dominance. If Microsoft hadn't succeeded in de-standardizing the web, choice of OS would have become largely irrelevant. Their abuse of monopoly powers set back web standardization by at least a decade.
This was an absolutely pivotal turn of events in the computing industry. It has had a large hand in defining the computing landscape for the past decade, and perhaps even the next decade. It really was that significant.
Agreed, and they pulled the same stunt with Sun's open source Java. They highjacked it too and began adding proprietary stuff to it that only worked with Internet Explorer.
In both cases (HTML and Java) we are still paying the price of the fractionation that was caused.
Thompson
Let's just agree on this: that Microsoft's recommitment to Office on Mac was a NECESSARY condition for saving the platform, but it may not have been sufficient all by itself. In that case, we are BOTH right. At the time, the Mac would have been doomed without Office, but it also took a lot of other great moves by Apple (e.g. the iMac) to save it too.
Also: my memory differs from yours with respect to timing between announcement of the deal and commitment to Office for Mac. In other words, I am quite sure (because I was paying close attention to all things Mac even back then) that the information about Office for Mac and the deal we are discussing were revealed simultaneously.
Thompson
My point was the announcement was of more symbolic than substantive value, since Microsoft was already committed to the next version of Office before the announcement was made. By the time the next version of Office was released in 2001, Apple had made other strides in recovering from their tailspin, which could well have induced Microsoft to continue developing Office for the Mac without the 1997 deal. Don't get me wrong, the politics were important. I just question how much difference it made in what Microsoft actually did in terms of developing Office for the Mac.
I don't think our memories differ. The $150 million investment, the technology sharing agreement, the MSIE and Office deal -- all were announced at the same time. Did I ever imply otherwise? If, I didn't mean to.
Nobody wanted to be buying the next WordStar-type product (regardless of the merits)...
Is that why GM went bankrupt and needed to be bailed out by the US Gov then?
LIKE
Amazing how people can stair history in the face & learn nothing from it.