I have been listening to an outstanding podcast that can be found at www.acquired.fm.
A recent episode focused on the history of MSFT which was riveting. The history caused me to take a look at my own personal history to better understand my motivations and reactions to the PC's evolution and MSFT's role. But I was also forced to revise long-held misconceptions (the generation of which my mind excels at - ugh). They are in chronological order:
1) that MSFT set out to control Operating Systems. This is not true. MSFT started out as an interface between the machine and BASIC computer language. The Operating System engagement - which ended up key - came along later as Gates and Allen were forced to develop in order to keep the interface as standard on IBM's first PCs,
2) that MSFT and AAPL had always been enemies. This is not true. Actually, MSFT had done so poorly in applications - with Multiplan being kicked by Lotus - that MSFT worked to create products for AAPL based on graphical user interface. Windows 1.0 was promoted jointly. The animosity developed when it turned out that graphical user interface technology had been granted not simply to Windows 1.0 forever, but Windows products forever,
3) that MSFT had used its Operating System dominance to obliterate Lotus and WordPerfect (as argued by Larry Ellison of Oracle). This is not true. Instead, Lotus and WordPerfect stayed on old technology while MSFT built its future around the emerging graphical user interface technology. Lotus simply allocated its huge profits in another direction (Notes, etc) that proved a dead end,
4) that MSFT had somehow tricked IBM into losing what was the best part of the PC - the software. This is not true. IBM was simply blinded by the power of its dominance and its emphasis on mainframes. There was many stupid moments, but the key moment was when IBM introduced its own operating system - the O/S 2 and then hobbled it by using Intel's old chip - the 286 - while the clones went on to victory with the 386. MSFT rode that train as hardware wars drove PC prices down and adoption rates up.
I did leave the episode still thinking that MSFT made the same IBM-type mistake with the advent of smartphones. Just as IBM thought it was about the iron of hardware, so too did MSFT - especially Steve Ballmer - get obsessed with making the smartphones Window-centric. Had it not been for Satya Nadella replacing Ballmer, MSFT might have sailed off into the same sunset of irrelevancy that IBM inhabits.
