Is Microsoft Your Next Phone Company?
from the wouldn't-be-surprising dept
It’s quite a statement about Microsoft’s position in the market place that a publication like Business Week is already wondering if they’ll dominate the VoIP market where they barely have a presence today. They’ve certainly been under the radar, leaving the publicity to lots of smaller players – but if you look at the details it’s been clear for some time that they’ve been positioning themselves to be ready, depending on the market for VoIP and the regulatory environment. Well, the market seems to be picking up lots of steam and the regulatory environment got a lot clearer a few weeks ago with the decision on the “Pulver petition”. So, it might not be long before Microsoft is acting as your phone company as well. Still, it seems like it might be a bit early for Microsoft to really jump in. While the decision on the Pulver petition answered some question – it still left many blanks to be addressed, and a powerful Microsoft in the market may influence some of those decisions. It seems like they’re still better off lying low, putting all the right things in place, and showing up at a later date.
Comments on “Is Microsoft Your Next Phone Company?”
No Subject Given
With the current administration’s attitude toward antitrust enforcement, the question isn’t whether Microsoft will take over the phone business, it’s whether Microsoft will take over all business. The way things are going, it’s possible that in the not too distant future capitalism will be replaced with a feudal system, where everyone is a vassal to the king of Microsoft.
Re: No Subject Given
where everyone is a vassal to the king of Microsoft.
Paranoid much?
Microsoft had NO troubles with the feds until they announced the Quicken/Telco buyout intentions back in the ’90’s.
At that time, the entrenched feudal lords of Telcos and Banking got upset. And they ‘raised concerns’ to congresskritters. The good congresskritters (the ones bought and paid for by telco/banking) “looked into” Microsoft.
Microsoft has 2 divisions that make a profit – OS and Office. The rest are not profit centers.
Fear the corporate buying of government – yes. Fear Microsoft will be at the Center – no. Microsoft would have to muscle out all the other corporations who want to be at the center.
Rumblings of Bundling...
No one should be surprised when MS announces VOIP features embedded within their future OS releases(“LongDistanceHorn”?), which will also provide seamless hooks into apps like Outlook (dial from your address book) and Office. It’s just another way to retain market share through the stickiness of bundled features.
What’s a joke, of course, is how web browsers, media players and VOIP functions can be considered essential parts of an operating system instead of add-on applications. Regulators who don’t see this coming, with the associated marketplace implications, are just kidding themselves (or us).
At least this time around, there will be equal or better offerings from the open-source community to keep it interesting.
Re: Rumblings of Bundling...
“VOIP functions can be considered essential parts of an operating system instead of add-on applications. Regulators who don’t see this coming, with the associated marketplace implications, are just kidding themselves (or us).
At least this time around, there will be equal or better offerings from the open-source community to keep it interesting.”
Why should MS be forced by regulators not to improve and offer VOIP with Longhorn while open source can offer it free? And how do open source people make a living? Do they code for free forever? I am confused by the OSS war with MS.
Re: Re: Rumblings of Bundling...
I’m not at war with MS, no matter how many times my Windows PC locks up at work at inopportune moments.
What I hate, though, is the practice of integrating applications (browsers, media players, telephony, whatever…) so closely into an OS that MS can run around claiming that they’re part of the OS itself. That’s not a good OS, that’s just bloatware. If MS would focus on developing a lean, tight, stable and secure OS without all of these bells & whistles we’d all be better off.
You’re free to run your own apps on top of Windows, but you’re still paying for the MS-developed apps you’re not using in the higher price of the bloated OS.
IF MS wants to, they can offer all of these other apps for free if they want, but they should be just that – applications that can be added or removed as easily as a competitor’s product, so consumers can put together the platform they want.
If MS made clothing and wanted to get into the socks market, they’d just start stitching socks onto the cuffs of every pair of pants they sell, and claim that they’re now an embedded feature of MS-Pants since everyone wants the functionality of socks anyway. You’re free to buy your own sock and wear them – just be careful with those scissors when you try to uninstall the MS-Socks from the integrated offering.
(Guess the caffeine kicked in…)