New year's resolutions for Microsoft

Directions on Microsoft has released a list of what it considers the top 10 challenges for the software giant in 2005.

"Left unattended, each (challenge) could ultimately interrupt Microsoft's 25-plus-year run of growth and profits and leave the door open for younger, smaller and more nimble competitors," the analyst house said in its end-of-year research note Wednesday.

In the order they were published, the 10 challenges are:
• Better detailed, multiyear road maps for major products such as Windows XP, Office and Exchange.

• Revenue-generating acquisitions. According to Directions on Microsoft, the Great Plains Software, Navision and GeCad buys are not delivering enough fast enough.

• Better security--"despite laudable efforts by Microsoft, such as drop-everything-else code review, security is still a problem...In fact, the bad guys seem to be winning."

• Making the PC a home entertainment hub, not trailing integrated digital-lifestyle approaches that, at the moment, are led by others, notably Apple Computer.

• Doing a better job of convincing customers that they can get more out of their software by using newer versions.

• Fending off open-source software. This is about server software but now increasingly also about the desktop, in the form of the Linux operating system, the Firefox browser, and OpenOffice.org and its commercial variants.

• Convincing developers that its upcoming Longhorn version of Windows is the way forward.

• Making Xbox 2 the profitable, well-supported game console the first Xbox has struggled to become.

• Shipping a 64-bit version of Windows that encourages PC upgrades.

• "Playing well with others." On the day that the software company received no slack from a European court, Directions on Microsoft noted, "Microsoft needs cautious, clearly written and tightly enforced rules of engagement for employees working with customers, partners and competitors--particularly cases involving any exchange of intellectual property or trade secrets. Otherwise, it will be planting the seeds of tomorrow's multibillion-dollar settlements."

Tony Hallett of Silicon.com reported from London.

It needs a new version of IE

MS really needs to update IE. We want a more secure browser that is compatible with the latest web standards. Otherwise it will steadily lose users to other browsers. That could be disasterous for MS.

[jltnol]

your kidding, right?

Saying IE, Security and Web Standards in the same sentence is
like saying Iraq, Security, and Winning in the same sentence as
well.

MS always has great plans.... just look at what Longhorn was
susposed to be, but the problem is that MS has a really bad
record of delivering... just look at what Longhorn is going to be:
another half-baked, half-hearted attempt to completly re-write
Windows. This is just going to be XP with a fresh coat of paint,
and an expensive price tag. And what is XP if not just Win2000
with cartoon graphics?

[dcparris]

Suggestion for Microsoft

Microsoft would do well to take a hint from Apple - adopt FreeBSD as the underlying OS, and just recreate the GUI to look like it currently does. If they keep it open source, they can benefit from reduced development costs.

[Soliton]

I wish too...

But then, thats just a wish ;)

[mortis9]

moron?

what kind of a moron are you? that has to be the stupidest thing i've ever seen written in a posting. why bother when you've nothing intelligent to write? they make money on licensing THEIR technology, not distributing a face lift on what's essentially FREE technology. you really think they'd be able to charge anywhere near what they do, if they were simply another opensource distributor? what the hell are you thinking.

definitely not... =o)

... all men are definitely NOT created equal. =o)

[Sboston]

Hmm

Except for having to re-write all Microsoft applications and third party software to work with this idea.

Ahh, I'll pass.

[General Lee Cynical]

What's with the Apple fixation?

"Making the PC a home entertainment hub, not trailing integrated digital-lifestyle approaches that, at the moment, are led by others, notably Apple Compute"

Seriously, what's with this fixation on Apple Computer? Does Apple even have a media center OS? Didn't think so. In terms of becoming part of a "digital lifestyle", Microsoft is lightyears ahead of Apple for the simple reason that people actually use Microsoft based computers. Speaking as a Zen Micro, Palm, and Sony Ericcson user, while I love my portable devices, the center of my "digital lifestyle" is my PC, which runs Windows.

Let's not forget about integration. I can play a game on my Microsoft powered console then switch over to some recorded TV on my Microsoft powered media center PC, download a video file to my Microsoft powered Pocket PC and send it over GPRS through my Microsoft powered smart phone. Microsoft owns the "digital lifestyle". Even Apple's precious iPod is just one of many devices that run under Windows.

[ordaj]

And that virus will follow you the whole way...

And spyware. And adware. And your whole digital life will be compromised. Resistance is futile.

Apple fixation

Apple simply has a different way of doing things and it appears
to be working. In fact, the article uses the wrong words - Apple
has the digital hub concept, Windows has the media centre
concept. For Apple, the computer exists as a storage place (or
server) that transfer information to other devices (i.e the iPod,
iPod photo) while the Windows format is the have everything at
the computer. You actually seem to be following Apple's model,
not Window's! Apple's basic idea is that people don't want to
watch something on the computer, listen to music on the
computer, look at photos on the computer, rather, they would
keep all that info on the computer but farm it off to other
devices, so you would still watch TV on a TV, listen to music on
a stereo (connected to a Mac via Airport express, for example).
The two concepts sound similar, but are vastly different. The
fixation with Apple is that they are making moves (with iPod and
Airport express and the spectulated media server) while MS isn't
doing too much, but rather relying on HP, Dell etc to do the
work.

The big thing here is that if Apple wins the digital music war,
they will own everything! Not joking here, if AAC and Apple's
DRM wins over MS Media, Apple will control all digital concent
which is HUGE! Imagine the blow to MS if Dell were to dump
their own DJ player and adopt the iPod as HP has done (and with
it Window's Media for AAC)?

The other thing about Apple is that they can design beautiful
things - software aside, industrial design is very import for
consumer products, as the iPod is showing. This may be one of
the few areas where cost doesn't much matter, and in fact, a
lower price is bad (think of diamonds - would you buy a $100
one or a $150000 one if you had the money? If you just
answered $100, you are now single!) Consumer electronics are
all about style and design - not price.

That's the fixation with Apple (In my opinion)

[Jonathan F]

Windows Media Centre isn't that big a deal

The problem is that you don't necessarily represent the majority of users. How many people actually own Media Centre PCs besides uber-geeks? Not that many.

Media Centre PCs are also going to be increasingly ineffective once HDTV becomes standard and broadcast flags limit, if not eliminate completely, the ability to record or (possibly) even play HD programming on a computer. Not much point in having that 300 GB hard drive in your box when there's nothing to fill it with!

Most people still think of their TVs as discrete devices, and don't care enough about cataloguing everything on one box. They may also simply not have enough money to spend several hundred (or more) on a second computer.

I'd like to think that Apple's route is smarter: rather than try to strike an awkward balance between computers and TVs at a time when the TV industry isn't willing to cooperate, they try to make the computer the hub for media-related tasks you EXPECT to use a computer for - organizing digital photos, playing back a digital music collection, and editing home movies. And Apple does a pretty good job of that.

Oh, and by the way, it's a poor logical maneuver to try to attack Apple because they have a relatively small demographic. Popularity doesn't equal superior quality - just look at the latest American presidential race for proof.

[Tex Murphy PI]

Microsoft's should concentrate on

ONE thing, and ONE thing only.

SECURE WINDOWS!

I'm tired of patching their ill-designed, ill-coded products!

[lgmbackman]

The Problem

The problem is that MS is to big for one and a half brains to run.
Not too much left to copy, (well Voip and grid computing).
Add to that the lack of interest in stuff that add no income, like the IE or security and bugg fixing.

[rdean]

#6 inconsistent with #10

Microsoft can't fend off open source software without playing dirty. They can't play nicely with others *and* fend off open source.

Ultimately, the issue should not be about "fending off" open source. If Open Source provides a better user experience (which is true in the case of Firefox imparticular), then it should win. Unfortunately, Microsoft's approach hasn't been to build a better IE; it's been to try to FUD Firefox.

Beyond that, I question the premise of the article. Understandably Directions on Microsoft has a bias, but they need to realize that tools are tools. They exist to serve humans. It makes no sense to back one tool over another on brand alone. In other words, I'm not about to use Microsoft because it's Microsoft. I'll use it when it's the best tool for the job (which, due to the long strides open source has made in the past two years, is less and less frequent -- I only use IE for Windows Update and my wife only uses it for updating her Yahoo! Messenger "avatar".)

[Sboston]

Ok

I'll agress with that.

For example, I am testing FireFox right now and decided I like it. As a mater of fact I'm going to introduce my Wife to FF soon. The battle there is not so much as it is not MS but it is DIFFERENT from what whe is used to. That is the battle for all users that are just that, users.

[Sboston]

Ok

I'll agree with that.

For example, I am testing FireFox right now and decided I like it. As a mater of fact I'm going to introduce my Wife to FF soon. The battle there is not so much as it is not MS but it is DIFFERENT from what she is used to. That is the battle for all users that are just that, users.

This list benefits MS at the cost of benefitting consumers

If what benefits MS is fending off competing software (Linux, Firefox, OpenOffice, etc) then how is a win for MS a win for anyone else? Consumers lose, there is less competition and less alternatives to choose from.

"Convincing developers that its upcoming Longhorn version of Windows is the way forward."

Again, consumers lose. Convincing them to use a different version of Windows is not going to solve any problems if the problems are in Windows itself.

"Doing a better job of convincing customers that they can get more out of their software by using newer versions."

How about fixing the software they've already released before considering new features that could potentially introduce more bugs? The problem is that MS hasn't already finished what's already on its plate.