Quick note, I put lots of links in here, go ahead and follow them, I think its worth it.
Tonight we went out to see The Incredibles. Definitely not for small children, lots of cartoon violence, but Jill and I enjoyed it. When I got home, Newsfire was ready with the latest
Steve Jobs versus Bill Gates article in the business section. Very interesting. It seems that Gates, who generally succeeds because of corporate client success, has the idea that
Microsoft can succeed in the music business too. The plan is to overtake Apple's huge lead due to the
iPod. So, here are the statements:
"Over time, proprietary standards always lose because industry standards always win because you get more for less," said Michael A. George, the general manager of
Dell's consumer business.
My Response: And Windows isn't proprietary?
The answer to that is "Yes, it is." So why, Mr. George, have you tied your company's success to an obvious (in your eyes) failure? Are you planning to let your company die a slow death? Fact is, Microsoft succeeds with a proprietary operating system. They shun many standards or
try to force their products to be adopted as the industry standard. If you are going to argue that Microsoft has created the standard on the PC, then why are you trying to compete against that same definition of "standard" in the portable music business? Looking to lose there? Find a consistent definition and stick with it. One of these interpretations works, and one doesn't. My guess is, based on the facts, that your music player (and the definition of "standard" that's its tied to) is the failure.
Next quote:
"It's a classic one," Mr. Gates said. "Apple has always been a hardware company. I think Apple will do things the Apple way, and Microsoft will do things the Microsoft way. I'd say the long-term factors all favor our approach."
My Response: And how many of your approaches actually make you money? I'd guess, not basing this on any data, that the approaches where you make money are in the corporate world. I'd be surprised if you make much in any money apart from what corporate America uses (i.e. Windows and Office). Even Microsoft's invasion of the home is based more on what people use at work than what they
want to use. The sad thing is that Apple's original Macintosh ad was far too true, only Microsoft has taken
IBM's place.
The saddest part about this whole article is that it assumes that Apple vs. Microsoft has always been Jobs vs. Gates.
Steve Jobs wasn't at Apple for over ten years, and those were the years when Windows overtook the Macintosh (in popularity, not ease of use).
