'They're operating in a mindset that's outside the tautological knowledge structure of most of the people who run the country. Microsoft is getting all this flak for not paying attention to Washington. Why should they? Gates has created an operating system that's become the central nervous system for an entire global culture.
Don't bother trying to create a better commercial desktop OS -- it doesn't matter how hard you try, how many engineers you throw at the problem, how much money you spend, or how many years you put into it. Microsoft owns that space and, worse, the public is totally complicit with that fact. People will not stop using Windows. It is a losing battle.
Scott Hacker, "He Who Controls the Bootloader", BYTE Magazine, August 27, 2001.
The Government holds that Microsoft is illegally using the near-monopoly of its Windows operating system to dominate the market for software used to view the World Wide Web. In addition, its lawsuit says the company is doing the same with Internet commerce. The Government insists that traditional antitrust safeguards must be enforced to prevent a dystopian situation in which consumers one day find themselves utterly dependent on Microsoft for all things digital -- not just one product or one industry but all the facets of life that are rapidly being transposed to cyberspace.
What is different about Microsoft is its distance from Silicon Valley. Rather than trading jobs for a better deal down the block, employees tend to stay put. With only a 7 percent turnover rate, Microsoft will hire 3,000 recruits this year. The insularity helps to reinforce a monolithic culture in which employees cultivate an almost fanatical devotion to their work and to Mr. Gates, whose combative cross-examinations on minute details are as legendary as his accessibility by E-mail to the lowliest employee. ("Even reasonably cynical people get starry-eyed over Bill," observed one of Microsoft's newer managers.)
Perhaps the most successful global monopoly is Microsoft, which has succeeded in gaining global market power not only in PC operating systems but in key applications such as browsers. [...] Microsoft's monopoly power leads not only to higher prices but to less innovation. [...] The failure to develop a global approach to global cartels and monopolies is yet another instance of economic globalization outpacing political globalization.
Microsoft has had two goals. One was to copy the Mac and the other was to copy Lotus' success in the spreadsheet. And over the course of the last 10 years, Microsoft accomplished both of those goals. And now they are completely lost. They were able to copy the Mac because the Mac was frozen in time. The Mac didn't change much for the last 10 years. It changed maybe 10 percent. It was a sitting duck. It's amazing that it took Microsoft 10 years to copy something that was a sitting duck. Apple, unfortunately, doesn't deserve too much sympathy. They invested hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into R&D, but very little came out They produced almost no new innovation since the original Mac itself.
We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data, we don't participate in it.
Johnson, Kevin; Martin, Scott; O'Donnell, Jayne; Winter, Michael (June 15, 2013). "Reports: NSA Siphons Data from 9 Major Net Firms". USA Today. Retrieved June 6, 2013.
While we have seen great success, we are hungry to do more. Our industry does not respect tradition — it only respects innovation. This is a critical time for the industry and for Microsoft. Make no mistake, we are headed for greater places — as technology evolves and we evolve with and ahead of it. Our job is to ensure that Microsoft thrives in a mobile and cloud-first world.
One of the most painful things in our culture is to watch other people repeat earlier mistakes. We're not fond of Bill Gates, but it still hurts to see Microsoft struggle with problems that IBM solved in the 1960s.