Microsoft, Vista and Competition

One thing that seems to have almost slipped under the radar lately is a set of new statements from Microsoft regarding competition policy and how it will be adopted within the company. While many will have a cynical view that this is all just about keeping the lawyers at bay for a while, I feel it’s a refreshing change to see these sorts of principles spelled out in some detail. It means that those that deal with the company on a daily basis can help keep them on their toes in relation to their own stated policies. The new policy is designed to work from Vista onwards.


Brad Smith (who is also a Senior Vice President and corporate secretary at Microsoft) is the General Counsel for the company. In a speech at the National Press Club on July 19th, he spelled out how this should work. I was interested to see that he said he felt 2007 would be a watershed year for the company and that he thought it was important to be quite transparent on these plans and to make them very public.


He acknowledged the special position the company has in the worldwide IT community regarding operating systems and says the company needs to be principled and transparent, when dealing with system builders, developers and end users.


I was particularly interested in the commitments to developers:


The first was to publish details of all relevant APIs, particularly to middleware in the operating system, to enable others to build onto Windows as easily as Microsoft themselves do.


The second that Microsoft Live would continue to be separate from the operating system and not required.


The third is that Microsoft will help keep the Internet free and open and not use its position to block access to others by end-users.


The fourth is that they will not enter into contracts that are Microsoft-exclusive. Developers are to be free to develop, support and promote products that compete with any part of the Microsoft operating system.


I like the direction that this is taking. I’d like to see it taken further though. A couple of extra things I’d like to see are:


1. Developers should have confidence in the stability of the platform. (The recent announcement that the MSDE would not be supported on Vista is an example of where I think this has fallen down. The MSDE was a current product last year. ISV’s that have built their products around it shouldn’t be now worried that their products won’t run on Vista only a year later).


2. Microsoft Learning should also have the exclusive contract promises applied to them. Currently, CPLS’s (training partners) are required to use Microsoft products exclusively when one exists. This means that they are not free to offer better training materials that might exist in the market and it stifles the development of good courseware.


Overall though, I really like the direction these statements are taking.

One thought on “Microsoft, Vista and Competition

  1. We hear this kind of thing from Microsoft from time to time in “Informal” channels. A formal policy is very definitely a good thing in that it gives developers “confidence” in their build directions.

    The thing i feel would make this work is to put a set time frame within which the policy can and will not be changed.

    You touch on the point of the MSDE not being supported in Vista… well maybe if Microsoft release a “Product” it should have a minimum support life in the core product of “3 Years”, and 6 months prior to that expiry a support directive to migrate to current core which will channel for a further 3 years. The option is that clients of developers DO NOT UPGRADE so that they may continue to gain the benefit of the software. The whole aim of an upgrade is to sell increased benefit to the end user. So who will go out and invest in Vista if they cant run their existing 3rd party software from it. If that software was delivering a competitive advantage to my business and you told me i could no longer run it… I would not upgrade. A policy of supporting across 3 years makes it easier to sell my 3rd party product to my client… then if 6 months before I lost that support I KNEW what I needed to do to get my clients into the new platform such that they would get a further 3 years use out of my product… well you dont need to be Einstein to figure that one out.

    The danger with policy is that Microsoft may become a recruitment organisation for the Australian Political Parties.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *