There have been several news items this week with prophesies of doom and gloom for Microsoft's Vista operating system. After Steve Balmer's quote about its lackluster launch, the sharks have been circling and, truthfully, the press (especially the blogs) have been quite amusing.

I know most of you think that operating systems are boring and meaningless. But, the only reason you can enjoy such a disconnected vision of the computer, television, media, technology and entertainment world is because Windows has enjoyed a virtual monopoly in the consumer operating system business since they went into business. Based on the news this week, and the generally poor reaction to Vista, this monopolistic stranglehold may be less firm than it once was. I'd like you to think about it and what impact it may have on your business.

Most analysts say that 90-95% of computers are running a Microsoft Windows operating system. (Which is why Bill Gates is the richest man in the world.) About 6% are running an Apple OS with hardware from Apple (Which is why we're not holding a telethon for Steve Jobs any time soon.) and 1-3% are running something else (Linux, Unix, etc.) In a perfect world, a substantial number of existing Windows compatible computers would upgrade to the new operating system and virtually all new computers would come with OEM (original equipment manufacturer) versions pre-installed. This would be Vista heaven.

But, let's consider a world where Vista was not only a flop, it was a total crash and burn — what would the world look like then?

For this thought experiment, let's imagine a world where consumers are forced to buy computers with Vista, but corporate IT directors refuse to upgrade. This makes telecommuting and bringing work home very difficult. Let's take it one step further and have corporate managers refuse to retrain employees to use the new version of Microsoft Office, since it does not work quite like its predecessor. I know that this is far fetched, but remember, we're pretending.

In this dark, evil world people would be forced to use other, more compatible and ubiquitously available tools. They would take control of their computer environments and resort to web-based email clients. Can anyone take gmail, yahoo mail, msn mail, or .mac mail seriously?

For word processing and spreadsheets, people would start using browser-based Ajax applets like Google's Docs & Spreadsheets. It's compatible with every version of Word and you can use it on any java-enabled browser. Humm … not too much of a hardship.

What about the browser? Without Vista, my Windows XP computer is very happy to run IE 7 or Firefox -- I can do almost anything with those, do I really need to switch?

If a large enough group started using browser-based applets to do their work, would computer manufacturers need to ship their computers with Vista? Why not a different OS that had the ability to launch a great browser and some file storage?

A world without Vista might seem like a world with Vista -- but somehow different. Why? Firstly, because old XP computers are nearing their planned obsolescence. The gigantic hole in the ground that eats computers is about to open up and swallow them. This will force many people to purchase new computers. What operating system will they choose? Will it have to be Vista?

Now I am not suggesting that you don't need or want Vista. I'm not suggesting that the product is defective or undesirable in any way. I am simply suggesting that there are a zillion ways (both Operating System-based and browser-based) to do without it. And, I am also listening to the rank and file who are decrying that, all things being equal, Vista is a sub-optimal choice.

Which begs the question, what if this is the first product of Microsoft's that people really don't buy? What would change? Would Apple's OS X grab a bigger market share? They just dropped the word "computer" from their company name. Pretty soon they may be an entertainment company. Are they the operating system company of the future? Would Linux operating systems become more prevalent? Or, would the world become a hodgepodge of disparate OSs with only Java in common?

A browser-based, Java-compatible cross platform world would be a very interesting place indeed. In fact, many would argue that we are almost there now. Java-enabled browsers show up in smart phones, computers, and dedicated consumer electronics devices. Will the future be filled with applets running client-side? Would you be willing to buy a computer that didn't have a user-noticeable operating system, just browser-based web-functionality? It would certainly turn the consumer computer business on its collective ear.

By all accounts, this is the year of online video and self-expression. We see it everywhere. There are already several formats of video in common use and dozens of players which all rely on some version of Windows to run. Flash runs in a browser so does Windows Media, except on a Mac, unless you have a Flip4Mac plug-in, then it runs but not with Windows DRM, except you can play the file, blah, blah, blah …

Can you imagine a world that is even less standardized than the one we have? It may be closer than you think.

Comments

[jbelkin]

I think we're entering the best time - we consumers decide what works best for us - instead of being forced to use WMA as an audio format, it was soundly rejected in favor of mp3's - in everything from graphic card drivers to DVD rippers - if you try to decide what format "is best," we as consumers decide if we accept or reject it. If you post your clips in Real format, someone will convert it to Divx or QT ... and if you add a "copyright" filter like Google is doing to YouTube, we'll just move to on to another new video player site. WE CONTROL ALL CHOICES from here on out. Companies like MS don't really get it - they still keep cranking out a Home Media Pc with layers upon layers of DRM when we can download a FREE DVR software to run on any computer - XP, mac or LInux ... Companies better get used to it. We will crack any DRM, we will ignore anything we dislike and we will make the final choice - it's that simple. Standardization is fine for corporations because they are all about uniformity - consumers are not - that is why MS is failing in this new world order. They just don't get consumers thinking what they decide is good enough is "good enough." It's not. MS is doomed if they continue along the same path as they did in the 1990's - they'll survive but be a niche corporate supplier with no resonance at all with consumers.

[Viswakarma]

There is only one problem with the Google's "Docs & Spreadsheets". Google is holding the family jewels!

[lrd]

I agree with jBelkin. Our dependency on MS is slowly whithering away. Amen to that! Consumers will make choices on what's best for them.

[lrd]

On another note, if we do continue along the current path, we may see the "splitting" up of the internet into different use groups/channels. For example, corporations may want to ensure that they continue to run optimally on MS based products since that's where they see uniformality and minimal transition costs While consumers may want to surf on other channels because other companies, like Apple and Google, are offering free or products better suited to their needs.

[DavidK]

Taking one quick review of Vista's EULA is enough reason for anyone to look further. The more MS has been warned about monopoly tactics the worse they get. I'm through being corraled into following the Piper!

[TJGeezer]

My last Microsoft is XP. It's not broken and I can run it as a virtual machine. I'm now learning Linux. Using the Xandros distribution, because it comes with programs like CrossOver that make the transition easier. Discovered my Logitech mouse has no Linux driver and is a source of instability, so I'll stay away from Logitech products that have no Linux drivers - gotta expect small live-and-learn experiences when leaving the increasingly restrictive Microsoft nest, I suppose. The way I see is - the RIAA killed the Zapster music community and, without that Internet equivalent of local radio, CD sales began their steady slide. The more 13-year-olds they sued, the worse it got. And that is the crashing train Microsoft, with its DRM and ph9one-home crap, has decided to board. You know, if I have to shop for hardware a little more carefully to get away from that, it's worth it.

[gmcpherson]

I bought Vista Basic for two of my home machines. I don't want all the added junk in my OS that the other versions have. I have to say, it has been amazingly painful for the applications I count on the most that do not carry the Microsoft brand. As a result I'm slowly moving more on to web 2.0 type apps since they tend to be more stable and less reliant on the OS. As a result, I think once I find all the things I want on the web, I'll probably move over to Linux. The "live" DVD versions I've tried recently don't have any more issues with drivers etc. than Vista.

[Philip from Australia]

Could the lack of uptake be because the early adopters got onto the public Beta bandwagon? When does that time out? That would explain some. So would software incompatabilities. I didn't get XP until after service pack 1. And is less than expected sales the same as not making money? Philip

[anon]

I just can't see corporate purchasing managers rebelling against Vista--it would be career suicide. They'll just blame the IT dept. for any problems with Office, etc. Monopoly means that consumers have NO choices. Office and other apps practically guarantee this.

[Chris Wegener]

This is an interesting thought experiment but that is just as far as it will go. I work with many end users and very few have any concept of the choices. If people want to run Linux, more power to them, but if the problem with users installing software that breaks their computer is large on Windows it is huge on Linux. Users are complaining about adjusting to the new look and feel of Office 2007 trying and grasp the problems with every application have a different interface, many with no standard or usability testing behind them. Users complain about the difficulty of using Microsoft help, what will they do with applications that have no help files at all? For all of Microsoft's faults, and there are many, their applications by and large follow the same standards and exhibit the same behavior with the same inputs. The popular open-source software packages copy, rather slavishly Microsoft's menu structure and dialog box design. This makes it seem simple to move users over to these software packages until you try to accomplish some more esoteric tasks. Anyone ever try to automate any of the open source spreadsheets to simplify routine office tasks? Suddenly Excel and VBA seem golden. Certainly simple letters and memos are trivial. What about work group coordination or task sequencing over the web. What happens when your internet connection fails just before a deadline? Let's not kid ourselves here. Until the open source movement puts as much time and energy into usability design, interface standardization and documentation there is no viable alternative to Microsoft.

[Sean McMullin]

I am certainly no MS slave, but Chris has it entirely right. Usability and documentation are key to the success of other OS choices becoming viable, and have been for years with absolutely no progress in the area. It's the skateboarder problem all over again. How does a community improve its image when the whole idea behind the community is rebellion from accepted standards? Answer: it doesn't.

[Steve]

There are two main problems with Vista: One: for businesses, upgrades to the OS and the application suite (we use XP and Office, with a handful of Adobe CS users) provide zero benefit. The computer already does what we want it to do. There are only "anti-improvements" possible on the word-processing front, for instance; even Office 2003 was a big step backwards for usability (talk to any company that thought they'd trained their staff how to do simple mail merges, for instance). The only additional functionality we are interested in is coming from advanced database applications (web or otherwise), not consumer stuff. So Vista is pointless; the desktop is basically perfected. Two, the home consumer wants a media solution (and though I HATE that word, here it makes sense, because all we have to date is problems). And Vista can't address that desire, because of DRM. Unless and until Microsoft bucks the entertainment industry, they won't be able to do anything. And that's going to have to be a very big, expensive, bitter public fight. Actually, that applies to anyone, including Apple. The Mac people like to think they've solved all these problems, but they haven't, not even close. The solution hasn't been made yet. It sure as hell isn't "Web 2.0" whatever the hell that's supposed to be. But when it comes it will not have DRM. I'm not convinced by Google, either. They've got a ton of cash, but it's all from ads. That's nice for them, and lets them play around with stuff a lot, but very little of what they're coming up with is a long term answer to anything. Docs & Spreadsheets? Neat idea, but if you think Word and Excel are bloatware...those things are bloated beyond recognition just to get an inch off the ground. And yes, I have broadband and a hot new PC. But they are SLOWWWWW, and worse than slow, they're herky-jerky and latent. Videos? if crap quality is what you want, and as long as Sony and Universal haven't got ahold of you yet.... So: for the two main uses for computers: offices don't want to upgrade to Vista, and players CAN'T upgrade because of DRM. The computer of the future is....a standalone region-free DVD player from China, $50.

[Hieu Hoang]

AFAIK, the J in AJAX is JavaScript (aka ECMAScript), not Sun's Java.

[Scott]

The J in Ajax does NOT stand for JavaScript either. It is a common misconception that Ajax stands for Asynchronous Javascript and XML, but that is untrue. Ajax is merely a term, not an acronym. That being said, Ajax is used in conjuction with Javascript and, often, XML.