After 17 years with the company, Jim Allchin retired from Microsoft as of Jan. 30, 2007 – the day on which Microsoft officially released the Windows Vista operating system to consumers. James (Jim) Allchin served as co-president of Microsoft's Platforms & Services Division from September 2005 until his retirement. In that position, Allchin shared overall responsibility with Kevin Johnson for the division of the company that includes the Windows and Windows Live Group, Windows Live Platform Group, Online Business Group, Market Expansion Group, Core Operating System Division, Windows Client Marketing Group, Developer and Platform Evangelism Group, and the Server and Tools Business Group.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-04-21
It does compete and given that the alternatives have terrible hardware support,
MOST alternatives have worse hardware support than Windows. Gee, I wonder whose fault that is.
and there is a complete dearth of application support on non-Microsoft platforms like Linux,
Eh, what?
is there any wonder for Microsoft's monopoly.
I agree, Microsoft's monopoly is completely explicable, but for completely different reasons than you would like to pretend. For example, even if NO other operating system had ANY hardware support at all, I am still PERFECTLY within my rights to have computers I buy supplied without an operating system so that I can install any I wish - but just try telling that to PC vendors.
People will start moving once they can run the same applications they have now, but in native linux form, on Linux; until that day, people will be forced to run Windows because of the ability to run the applications they like rather than it being anything to do with any so-called love of the Windows operating system.
Despite your contention to the contrary, there are now more areas than ever where users of other platforms can opt for similar and compatible applications, and that trend will most likely only continue. Whatever you think of Scribus, for example, it's one area I did not expect to see addressed by FOSS programs for quite a while yet. (And there are other, proprietary, alternatives). However, in the interim it might be a good idea for more Linux distributors to start shipping CrossOver Office.
How about a better and more to the point explaination; Windows Live sucks - plain and simple; Microsoft left it too late to deliver their services online, their Live content is too American focused - clue to Microsoft, the world doesn't revolve around the US of A, no matter how ignorant the general populace at Microsoft headquarters maybe.
Microsoft have shown themselves perfectly capable of shipping bucketloads of an excrescence with impunity - I refer not only to WindowsME, which I know only by reputation, but to Windows98 also. It's not quality of the product that matters when people buy operating systems, it's quality of marketing.
However, except for the points in this post, I agree, mostly.
Member since:2005-07-06
MOST alternatives have worse hardware support than Windows. Gee, I wonder whose fault that is.
The fault lies with the Linux programmers and the Linux distribution companies who refuse or simply too lazy to talk to hardware companies to get hardware support improved.
Eh, what?
Dearth - shortage, commonly used in the context of food.
There is a shortage, apart from some 'compatibility' and 'emulation' applications, by enlarge, there is no proprietary third party network; why haven't Novell and Red Hat done anything to encourage third parties to release desktop software for Linux? why don't these organisations invest money into the respective companies as to pay for the porting of those applications?
I agree, Microsoft's monopoly is completely explicable, but for completely different reasons than you would like to pretend. For example, even if NO other operating system had ANY hardware support at all, I am still PERFECTLY within my rights to have computers I buy supplied without an operating system so that I can install any I wish - but just try telling that to PC vendors.
You can do it right now; go down to your local computer assembly place and purchase one; white box manufacturers make up over 50% of the computers sold globally, they're hardly a weird thing.
Despite your contention to the contrary, there are now more areas than ever where users of other platforms can opt for similar and compatible applications, and that trend will most likely only continue. Whatever you think of Scribus, for example, it's one area I did not expect to see addressed by FOSS programs for quite a while yet. (And there are other, proprietary, alternatives). However, in the interim it might be a good idea for more Linux distributors to start shipping CrossOver Office.
Ok, we'll rely on Crossover - why don't I see the big distributors work with Crossover and third parties to add to wine as to allow greater compatibility between Windows applications and wine? there seems to be alot of things which the linux distributors fail to do - simply sitting on the side lines *hoping* for a company to port to Linux isn't a viable long term stratergy.
As for Scribus; great tool, and what I think they should do is start offering a 'add on pack' which includes an array of templates and clipart for a nominal fee - the money acquired from those sales could fund the project itself.
Microsoft have shown themselves perfectly capable of shipping bucketloads of an excrescence with impunity - I refer not only to WindowsME, which I know only by reputation, but to Windows98 also. It's not quality of the product that matters when people buy operating systems, it's quality of marketing.
Hence the reason I threw out the whole 'branding' junk which Microsoft threw around; the net is a whole new ball game and Microsoft doesn't quite no how to approach it; they'll eventually get there with a viable product, but I don't seem them being a major player.
Microsoft isn't going go away but I do think that their future growth will be stagnating if they don't do something about the fundamental problem with their business model - sure, people will point to the $50billion as proof that 'all is good' - a more recently example would be sun who had $9billion at one stage; time can creap up on those companies who are unprepared.
Member since:
2005-07-06
If Windows were forced to compete on its own merits it would be a dismal failure. PC operating systems are a one party state.
It does compete and given that the alternatives have terrible hardware support, and there is a complete dearth of application support on non-Microsoft platforms like Linux, is there any wonder for Microsoft's monopoly.
People will start moving once they can run the same applications they have now, but in native linux form, on Linux; until that day, people will be forced to run Windows because of the ability to run the applications they like rather than it being anything to do with any so-called love of the Windows operating system.
Yeah, and not only does nobody care, but also "Windows Live" is being "hurt by weak branding".
How about a better and more to the point explaination; Windows Live sucks - plain and simple; Microsoft left it too late to deliver their services online, their Live content is too American focused - clue to Microsoft, the world doesn't revolve around the US of A, no matter how ignorant the general populace at Microsoft headquarters maybe.
Add that to the fact that Google provides a much better experience than what Microsoft can provide; is there any surprised? Google's search is more accurate and faster, their email service is snappy and not loaded with tonnes of ads and crap.
Something Microsoft fails to realise is just that, people want to use the service; if they keep pissing the end user off with constant barrage of crap from advertisements and requesting 'feedback', the end user will simply give up and go to the superior provider; and given how easy it is to move from one provider to another, its going to be difficult to lock people in.
Edited 2007-02-01 11:01