"And where we fight needs to be done because you have a better idea, not cause you’re trying to tear someone else down."
Amen. Now I'd like to see Microsoft lead the way. Given Micrsoft's history, why would a firm (big or small) trust Microsoft to be a good partner?
And at this point, why do companies need to partner with Microsoft (besides to get at some of that $30b)? I think Google, Yahoo, and Apple have shown us that reliance on Microsoft is no longer a prerequisite to great success in personal computing.
You reap what you sow. Microsoft has been a bad partner for years -- it will be interesting to see if they can craft strategic partnerships that amount to more than just giving a company a lot of money.
Instead of focusing on partnerships, I hope Microsoft concentrates on delivering real value in its own products. The company has gotten away from that basic tenent and has instead spread itself thin trying to kill of every perceived threat it can imagine.
scobleizer
· 3 years ago
Mujibur: you sound like you've never had your hands on one of these new Smartphones or played an Xbox 360. Those deliver real value.
scobleizer
· 3 years ago
Mujibur: and regarding partnering with Microsoft. I've recently interviewed several partners of Microsoft's who are very happy. Now, I know also there are some who aren't happy and we're working to turn those around. If you know of some, please let me know and I'll kick butt to help them out.
Also, there isn't one Microsoft. Microsoft actually is like dealing with 300 different companies. One company might be very partner centric (like the SmartPhone division, or the IPTV division, for instance) while others aren't as good at that.
Mujibur
· 3 years ago
Scoble:
There is little innovative in Windows Mobile that hasn't been done before. I guess I should have specified delivering value through innovation.
I will give Microsoft credit for Xbox Live which is both innovative and well-done.
Why should firms partner with Microsoft given its past behavior Scoble?
Mujibur
· 3 years ago
Also, you say that Microsoft needs to do more to be a better partner yet you never offer specifics?
All we hear are stories about Ballmer calling Eric Schmidt bad names and claiming that he will kill Google.
Graham English
· 3 years ago
"We need more partnerships in this industry, not more fighting."
I'm so glad to hear you say it. I'm a Mac user and I really don't care if we have 1% or 90% marketshare. But to hear somebody talk about going against Apple is really to hear somebody say they're going against me!
I can't trust that type of thinking because it has contempt for end-users.
BTW, I love Naked Conversations. I'll be finished reading by the end of the day :)
FSFunky
· 3 years ago
"We need more partnerships in this industry, not more fighting."
I totally agree with this. In fact, I was especially reminded of this when I saw on Google Video Steve Jobs first keynote at Macworld in Boston in 1997 (Just search for Macworld 97 on Google Video, you'll find it).
It had a special appearance by Bill Gates to pledge to Apple at least five years of Microsoft Office. When Bill Gates' image appeared, the crowd booed. Very immature. Later Jobs said (paraphrasing) "We've got to get to rid of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."
It is unfortunate that people still need to have one clear "winner" and the "best" to feel comfortable. I use both Macs and Windows machines. And they each have their pros and cons.
Apple (mac) turns to Window ? Google ? NO Way ! Have You Hear about "AOL"? also Google with Aol what a Cheap Aol Aol s_uck! I think Google wants to Take Over on AOL. M-S-M is Best Overall.
Mujibur
· 3 years ago
Met:
I'm not trying to absolve Apple. My question still stands: why would I want to partner with Microsoft?
Anona
· 3 years ago
"Xbox 360. Those deliver real value."
Roberto, are you claiming that XBox has generated net profits for MSFT? Having *already* sunk in more than $4 BILLION, I don't know how a sane person can ever claim that XBox will deliver "real value" to MSFT shareholders? Or are you saying, damn the shareholders, we'll continue to subsidize it with their dollars? No wonder MSFT has been flat for years.
Papillon
· 3 years ago
Scoble: I quite like the point of view upon which you expound, is that the reality of things? Or are certain stakeholders' (viz. short-sighted shareholders) ultimate motives not having a bigger impact on the course of things that we're willing to accept according to what you say? Regardless, in this particular case (and in general), I do agree with your viewpoint and think that the manichean angle is erroneous- money talks and sounds loudest.
Mujibur: are you trying to be the new Christopher Coulter (even he is starting to behave more rationally and in a more discerning manner, at least from my point of view)? Because you're Apple fanboyism is starting to get on my nerves. Please stop ascribing every single Scobleizer posting to some imaginary MS s/s Apple match (where -1 for MS = +1 for Apple and vice versa) and please view things in lesser biased colours than your ever more annoying pseudo Apple-centric viewpoint (you claim not to have Apple's sole interests as your concern- but what then is the basis for your constant snarling? Do you own Apple shares? Are you an Apple employee? Or do you honestly think your point of view reflects that of a being concerned with "the higher good of all" (re: all of your omni -present last postings)? ). Rationalism is your friend, your happiness and the happiness of your readers yours as well. So please stop trolling and come to light.
Yours ever so selfishly [re: Adam Smith, Marx, Rousseau et al],
Papillon.
Papillon
· 3 years ago
Dear all, please accept my apologies for the grammar and rather loutish casting of my previous comment.
P.
met
· 3 years ago
Mujibar : I wasn't trying to get Apple into the picture. That blog answers your questions. Replace Apple with Microsoft into the article.
Companies can partner with Microsoft for a lot of reasons but to be complacent and think MS (or any other partnet) will mother them would be a stupid decision.
Joe
· 3 years ago
It had a special appearance by Bill Gates to pledge to Apple at least five years of Microsoft Office. When Bill Gates’ image appeared, the crowd booed. Very immature. Later Jobs said (paraphrasing) “We’ve got to get to rid of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose.”
It is unfortunate that people still need to have one clear “winner” and the “best” to feel comfortable. I use both Macs and Windows machines. And they each have their pros and cons.
Comment by FSFunky — January 15, 2006 @ 2:01 pm
I agree, I'm happy that apple is doing well again, but I think this constant wishfull thinking of pitting one company against another ranks right up there with my religion is better than yours, or Honda vs Toyota or Ford vs Chevy, it's the silliest and one of the most Immature things I constantly see.
I Rejoice in a healthy apple computer, and I'm realistic in the fact that Microsoft is not going to fade away anymore than IBM, oracle or SAP.
Google is enjoying it's wall street darling phase, whether they have a ten year run on the stock like Microsft did, is yet to be seen.
Anona
· 3 years ago
"When Bill Gates’ image appeared, the crowd booed."
Why shouldn't you boo the man that gave us the technology world's worst monopoly abuser? If you can't boo Gates, who can you boo?
met
· 3 years ago
anon: Thats why you see the new 'open' MS with a lot of faces (bosses). Its easy to taint one person like Steve Jobs and a whole company getting affected because of it.
Joe
· 3 years ago
Why shouldn’t you boo the man that gave us the technology world’s worst monopoly abuser? If you can’t boo Gates, who can you boo?
Comment by Anona — January 15, 2006 @ 3:35 pm
Gee I don't know, I didn't see Gates name on Amnesty Internationals list of those with crimes aginst Humanity.
Silly, Silly, Silly.
Anona
· 3 years ago
"Gee I don’t know, I didn’t see Gates name on Amnesty Internationals list of those with crimes aginst Humanity."
For starters, stagnating the growth of the web by emasculating IE for half a decade ought to get anyone booed off the stage. For causing untold billions of dollars over the years for the abysmal security architecture that we call Windows and Office, he ought to be jail. What MSFT did to its competitors by the illegal abuse of its monopoly should leave no doubt why the man that led that effort deserves our collective derision and boos. Boo.
Mujibur
· 3 years ago
Papillon:
Ironically I didn't mention Apple at all in this thread. It was brought up by someone else -- I wanted to talk about Microsoft...
Ace
· 3 years ago
"Why shouldn’t you boo the man that gave us the technology world’s worst monopoly abuser? If you can’t boo Gates, who can you boo?"
Hmmm...try that it's a bit immature...if grown men and women are booing a man who has certainly expanded the computer world (whether it be good or bad), then they need to visit anger management or something similar. Bill Gates isn't an enemy to the world...
Jack
· 3 years ago
Have you tried RssBandit? I cannot fault it and I've tried a lot of aggregators.
Christopher Coulter
· 3 years ago
Geesh, slow and bored journalist day. After that embarrassing Google Pack, you need not partner with Google on much. And why does Microsoft but care about Apple, they make almost as much on each Apple sale as Apple itself, re: Office. Indeed maybe more. Now with the eternal windbag Christensen saying Apple will be dead. What? That's the 10th time I have heard that. And forget not who saved them, Microsoft.
The real thing Microsoft needs a partner per is IBM. How come no one in the press ever talks about IBM? IBM is the real overall competitor, IBM's infrastructure crowds out Redmond. IBM could even be bigger had it not fizzled on Desktop and with Lotus. But IBM should be the main focus. Not Apple, not Google, not Sony...
Anona
· 3 years ago
"Bill Gates isn’t an enemy to the world…"
You don't need to have a human rights violator or an enemy of mankind to boo. A monopoly abuser will do. He was booed at a gathering of people who did suffer from his actions directly. Read the court records.
If I wanted to degenerate this by disparaging you as you did me above, I'd say you show symptoms of an abused wife, excusing the abuser. But I won't.
Microsoft's monopoly abuse has been a blight in the computing industry for nearly two decades. No amount of blogging or other forms of PR will change that.
anon
· 3 years ago
Bill Gates isn’t an enemy to the world…
Needless to say, a lot of people don't agree with you.
anon
· 3 years ago
I’m tired of these “who will defend against whom?” articles.
So why did you post this drivel?
Oh, and the company, a convicted antitrust felon, whose CEO said - and I quote - "I will f*cking kill Google" while throwing a chair is supposed to be partnering with Google? Too funny.
Methinks your MSFT stock is underwater and you're hoping that magical GOOG stock magic rubs off on Microsoft.
What a selfish, undeserved thing to hope for!
Ryan B
· 3 years ago
I loved searchFox but it's shutting down and I am currently looking. I wish they would include how NewsRiver looks. I don't want to sign up for a service and hate the UI and whatnot.
M. Liang Liu
· 3 years ago
freshman vs old guys
Brian J. Bartlett
· 3 years ago
Robert, like you I’m tired of these whom will go against whom or whom will gang up with whom to go against whom articles/blogs/headlines/whatever. While business is about competition it does not necessarily have to be a zero sum game, something I fought about with a few of my economics professors while getting that degree. Every consumer has to perceive value in your product before you can convince them to buy/rnet that product (as you observed). This value can come as a result of competition with another vendor’s product, directly where there is no competitor, in cooperation with another vendor’s product in a known configuration for instance in a cooperative arrangement, or here’s the kicker, come about in a vendor unknown configuration which happens far more than most businesses know/will admit.
The consumer electronics and tech sectors are not stable, instead it is a growing sector and there is a big, bad world out there that also wants these products as well. So, at this point, cut-throat competition to drive your competitors out of business just doesn’t make sense. You have to commit resources that are better spent elsewhere (R&D, consumer research, ads) in an attempt to either drive your competitors out of business or just outright buy them, which entails further costs. Merging companies isn’t exactly cheap.
I don’t see the tech/CE sector stabilizing for quite a long time. As I said, there’s a lot of world out there. The $100 laptop and the massive popularity of cell phones in the developing world are only two indicators. Who would have thought that there would have been a market in renting cell phone time in the developing world. Yet a lot of women are making a lot of money (on their scale) in this market. Vendor unknown configuration :-).
All Comments
Amen. Now I'd like to see Microsoft lead the way. Given Micrsoft's history, why would a firm (big or small) trust Microsoft to be a good partner?
And at this point, why do companies need to partner with Microsoft (besides to get at some of that $30b)? I think Google, Yahoo, and Apple have shown us that reliance on Microsoft is no longer a prerequisite to great success in personal computing.
You reap what you sow. Microsoft has been a bad partner for years -- it will be interesting to see if they can craft strategic partnerships that amount to more than just giving a company a lot of money.
Instead of focusing on partnerships, I hope Microsoft concentrates on delivering real value in its own products. The company has gotten away from that basic tenent and has instead spread itself thin trying to kill of every perceived threat it can imagine.
Also, there isn't one Microsoft. Microsoft actually is like dealing with 300 different companies. One company might be very partner centric (like the SmartPhone division, or the IPTV division, for instance) while others aren't as good at that.
There is little innovative in Windows Mobile that hasn't been done before. I guess I should have specified delivering value through innovation.
I will give Microsoft credit for Xbox Live which is both innovative and well-done.
Why should firms partner with Microsoft given its past behavior Scoble?
All we hear are stories about Ballmer calling Eric Schmidt bad names and claiming that he will kill Google.
I'm so glad to hear you say it. I'm a Mac user and I really don't care if we have 1% or 90% marketshare. But to hear somebody talk about going against Apple is really to hear somebody say they're going against me!
I can't trust that type of thinking because it has contempt for end-users.
BTW, I love Naked Conversations. I'll be finished reading by the end of the day :)
I totally agree with this. In fact, I was especially reminded of this when I saw on Google Video Steve Jobs first keynote at Macworld in Boston in 1997 (Just search for Macworld 97 on Google Video, you'll find it).
It had a special appearance by Bill Gates to pledge to Apple at least five years of Microsoft Office. When Bill Gates' image appeared, the crowd booed. Very immature. Later Jobs said (paraphrasing) "We've got to get to rid of the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose."
It is unfortunate that people still need to have one clear "winner" and the "best" to feel comfortable. I use both Macs and Windows machines. And they each have their pros and cons.
http://www.askdavetaylor.com/how_can_i_avoid_ha...
Google ? NO Way !
Have You Hear about "AOL"? also Google with Aol what a Cheap Aol Aol s_uck!
I think Google wants to Take Over on AOL.
M-S-M is Best Overall.
I'm not trying to absolve Apple. My question still stands: why would I want to partner with Microsoft?
Roberto, are you claiming that XBox has generated net profits for MSFT? Having *already* sunk in more than $4 BILLION, I don't know how a sane person can ever claim that XBox will deliver "real value" to MSFT shareholders? Or are you saying, damn the shareholders, we'll continue to subsidize it with their dollars? No wonder MSFT has been flat for years.
Mujibur: are you trying to be the new Christopher Coulter (even he is starting to behave more rationally and in a more discerning manner, at least from my point of view)? Because you're Apple fanboyism is starting to get on my nerves. Please stop ascribing every single Scobleizer posting to some imaginary MS s/s Apple match (where -1 for MS = +1 for Apple and vice versa) and please view things in lesser biased colours than your ever more annoying pseudo Apple-centric viewpoint (you claim not to have Apple's sole interests as your concern- but what then is the basis for your constant snarling? Do you own Apple shares? Are you an Apple employee? Or do you honestly think your point of view reflects that of a being concerned with "the higher good of all" (re: all of your omni -present last postings)? ). Rationalism is your friend, your happiness and the happiness of your readers yours as well. So please stop trolling and come to light.
Yours ever so selfishly [re: Adam Smith, Marx, Rousseau et al],
Papillon.
P.
Companies can partner with Microsoft for a lot of reasons but to be complacent and think MS (or any other partnet) will mother them would be a stupid decision.
It is unfortunate that people still need to have one clear “winner” and the “best” to feel comfortable. I use both Macs and Windows machines. And they each have their pros and cons.
Comment by FSFunky — January 15, 2006 @ 2:01 pm
I agree, I'm happy that apple is doing well again, but I think this constant wishfull thinking of pitting one company against another ranks right up there with my religion is better than yours, or Honda vs Toyota or Ford vs Chevy, it's the silliest and one of the most Immature things I constantly see.
I Rejoice in a healthy apple computer, and I'm realistic in the fact that Microsoft is not going to fade away anymore than IBM, oracle or SAP.
Google is enjoying it's wall street darling phase, whether they have a ten year run on the stock like Microsft did, is yet to be seen.
Why shouldn't you boo the man that gave us the technology world's worst monopoly abuser? If you can't boo Gates, who can you boo?
Thats why you see the new 'open' MS with a lot of faces (bosses).
Its easy to taint one person like Steve Jobs and a whole company getting affected because of it.
Comment by Anona — January 15, 2006 @ 3:35 pm
Gee I don't know, I didn't see Gates name on Amnesty Internationals list of those with crimes aginst Humanity.
Silly, Silly, Silly.
For starters, stagnating the growth of the web by emasculating IE for half a decade ought to get anyone booed off the stage. For causing untold billions of dollars over the years for the abysmal security architecture that we call Windows and Office, he ought to be jail. What MSFT did to its competitors by the illegal abuse of its monopoly should leave no doubt why the man that led that effort deserves our collective derision and boos. Boo.
Ironically I didn't mention Apple at all in this thread. It was brought up by someone else -- I wanted to talk about Microsoft...
Hmmm...try that it's a bit immature...if grown men and women are booing a man who has certainly expanded the computer world (whether it be good or bad), then they need to visit anger management or something similar. Bill Gates isn't an enemy to the world...
The real thing Microsoft needs a partner per is IBM. How come no one in the press ever talks about IBM? IBM is the real overall competitor, IBM's infrastructure crowds out Redmond. IBM could even be bigger had it not fizzled on Desktop and with Lotus. But IBM should be the main focus. Not Apple, not Google, not Sony...
You don't need to have a human rights violator or an enemy of mankind to boo. A monopoly abuser will do. He was booed at a gathering of people who did suffer from his actions directly. Read the court records.
If I wanted to degenerate this by disparaging you as you did me above, I'd say you show symptoms of an abused wife, excusing the abuser. But I won't.
Microsoft's monopoly abuse has been a blight in the computing industry for nearly two decades. No amount of blogging or other forms of PR will change that.
Needless to say, a lot of people don't agree with you.
So why did you post this drivel?
Oh, and the company, a convicted antitrust felon, whose CEO said - and I quote - "I will f*cking kill Google" while throwing a chair is supposed to be partnering with Google? Too funny.
Methinks your MSFT stock is underwater and you're hoping that magical GOOG stock magic rubs off on Microsoft.
What a selfish, undeserved thing to hope for!
The consumer electronics and tech sectors are not stable, instead it is a growing sector and there is a big, bad world out there that also wants these products as well. So, at this point, cut-throat competition to drive your competitors out of business just doesn’t make sense. You have to commit resources that are better spent elsewhere (R&D, consumer research, ads) in an attempt to either drive your competitors out of business or just outright buy them, which entails further costs. Merging companies isn’t exactly cheap.
I don’t see the tech/CE sector stabilizing for quite a long time. As I said, there’s a lot of world out there. The $100 laptop and the massive popularity of cell phones in the developing world are only two indicators. Who would have thought that there would have been a market in renting cell phone time in the developing world. Yet a lot of women are making a lot of money (on their scale) in this market. Vendor unknown configuration :-).