By Andy McCue, 13 July 2004 16:55
NEWS Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has criticised the lack of innovation in open source software and accused the community of merely trying to "clone" commercial software.
Speaking at Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference in Toronto today, Ballmer admitted that open source is "keeping us on our feet" but, describing himself as a caged animal on the topic, he said Windows is the safe technology bet for customers and partners today.
"What is winning most of the assignments on the server and virtually all the assignments on the desktop?"
Ballmer also hit back at criticism that Microsoft has stifled software innovation.
"Where's the technology innovation going to happen? Technology innovation has happened much more from commercial companies than open source. Open source has just been trying to do clones of commercial software. That's all Linux is – a clone of Unix," he said.
Ballmer said that with commercial software, businesses are guaranteed a "clear chain of responsibility" with regards to support and intellectual property. "Who's going to stand up and stand behind open source? No such clear line of responsibility exists."
Outlining target areas for growth over the next 12 months, Ballmer said the installed Novell and IBM Lotus Notes bases are "ripe for picking".
"There are more customers I've met in the last six months interested in Notes to Exchange migration than in the last five years."
Comments
There are 48 comments. Join the discussion
1. Seth McGowan
Anyone who has ever successfully ran open source software will tell you nothing but great things about it. The open source community is driven soley by the prospect of better technology. Looks to me like the bigger commercial buffs are trying to draw attention away from the real issue. Not only does open source compete and often out-preform its commercial counterparts, it does so without financial motivation. It offers people the chance to get done what they want to without spending oodles of cash, and this always makes companies uneasy. You can just smell the fear.
2. Marcus
Is Stevie Boy having a laugh?
For Microsoft, of all people, to accuse somebody else of cloning existing software goes way beyond the dog calling the cat furry!!!
MS-DOS was a clone of CP/M
Internet Explorer was a clone of NCSA Mosaic
Windows was a clone of Apple Mac/Xerox PARC's work
It's an old game, but it's a good one: ask a Microsoft evangelist to name a genuine technical innovation from Microsoft; i.e. an original idea that Microsoft thought up all by themselves!
There isn't anything significant!
3. anonymous
Almost everything in IT is a small improvement over what came before - all the way back to Babbage... Take Sun for example - what have they done that is/was new. You can always name some similar technology that someone has done before (such as Microsoft Transaction Server/COM+ before J2EE as a component based application environment).
4. anonymous
load of garbage
5. Peter Himashi
I really don't know what to say anymore... Ballmer's statemenst are so far off, you wonder if MS management is still in touch with reality.
Incredible... Microsofts statements have noticeably become stranger and stranger in the last six months. Is there anybody left on this planet who actually believes what they say? I don't think so.
Ah well. I guess that you reap what you sow.
6. anonymous
What worries me about the lack of reality of MS senior management is how many of my peers in IT management actually believe this stuff...
7. Andrew Lashley
It is often said by marketers and the like that;
'to take content/ideas from one source is Plagiarism but to take from multiple sources is called research'
Maybe it just that Microsofts 'Reasearch' is very good.....
8. Roger Huffadine
Marcus has written my comment for me
Had I not read his comment first I would have written the same words.
Hey Steve B while you are at it how about being REALLY innovative and standardizing the shortcut keys in Microsoft Office?
9. anonymous
More like Steve 'Barmy' Ballmer... where on earth did that 'King of the Dopplegangers' Bill Gates get him from?
10. Jamie Bishop
Instead of bitching about it why don't you stop buying Microsoft products? It's so funny to listen to the Anti Microsoft lobby shout hypocrisy! What frustrates them is the majority of people disagree and vote with their check books.
Open source is too expensive for commercial use. Commerce has to make a profit and for the majority that means they need systems that work.
I work within health organisations and seen some government initiatives to bring in open source brought to their knees. It has a long way to go before it offers any real competition.
11. JoJo
Well I believe everything that Steve says. Microsoft are true innovators and open source could never hope to make or innovate such great software, os, browsers etc.....and IE is the best browser on the earth - obviously 'cos it's so popular...
...........
..........
OMG! I've just woken up in a sweat. What a nightmare. For a minute, I thought Bill Gates was a God, and everyone should use Microsoft products. Luckily I woke up in time to complete my comments [in Firefox of couse] and redeem myself. Phew ;0
12. Craig
"Who's going to stand up and stand behind open source?"
Well, besides being an incredibly clunky sentence, IBM & Novell are standing up and standing behind it.
13. Ruprecht
Microsoft 'innovations'....
> The 'Blue Screen of Death'
> The GPF
> 'Unknown error' reporting
> 'Clippy'
> Releasing beta code as production
And of course my favourite...
> Big fat blokes 'dancing' on stage at product launches (now that was truly a first!)
14. anonymous
Bill is the Messiah.. not God.. just to correct an earlier corresponant. Ok. You seen Omen? 2nd coming.. ho ho..
15. anonymous
Somebody change the record please.
Microsoft were saying the same thing about Notes in the late 90's. Looks like Microsoft are once again using FUD tactics to try and stop people going the other way.
When the opposition is getting plaudits tell the masses we have something better coming and when eventually something does turn up it its like we could do that 2 years ago anyway.
16. Tony Life
Microsoft's original idea..
an operating system that you have to re-boot a majority of times you install or remove software.
17. Simon Blackham
If steve Ballmer means that the idiotic 'features' of Microsoft products have to be copied because the user is so used to them, then I suppose that the Open Source community can be accused of plagiarism!
Is putting a WordPerfect personality into MSword plagiarism?
Unfortunately Microsofts way has become a non-standard standard - eg UNC filenames (I thought Universal meant everybody - "No the slash - the one under the question mark" is a common phrase used in the Open Source community to their clients). When was the standard line delimiter changed from CRLF to NL? (Answer: before Microsoft existed!)
We are going to do the same thing with application software - if Microsoft have got something wrong - DO NOT COPY THEM.
18. Simon Cox
Ha ha ha ha ha! Oh I don't think I have laughed so much for a long time!
Ballmer is obviously being backed into a corner and is trying to worry IT managers into staying with MS again.
I don't remember the last Microsoft product that I used that wasn't moving into a space already occupied by someone elses software - open source or not. Where is there innnovation?
19. Simon
Jamie Bishop wrote : "Instead of bitching about it why don't you stop buying Microsoft products?"
Well, how about the way they have stictched up the business market with (at very best) dodgy tactics to prevent competition and open document formats. The "if you want to open documents sent to you then you are going to have to use (an up to date version of) Office because we've killed off any competition and we'll screw anyone that we think is doing too well at reading our files" approach to competition and open standards. Think that's a bit strong ? Why else would they patent their XML office file format if they don't expect people to use it ? Why else would they make a point of making it difficult for anyone not using the vary latest version of their software ?
And why suppport open HTML standards when you have the market share to impose proprietry standards that no-one else can work with. Think they don't ? Well if you use an MS tool to create your web pages, the code WILL be MS HTML, not open standards HTML.
Their business practice is clear to see, make it all look nice and easy, sell to the senior management who can't see the risks, and get your customers through the 'no exit' technology gate. They say that in the drugs market, the first hit is free !
I've tried to keep their dominance out from my employer, but when dealing with management that can't differentiate between "I need to read Excel files therefore I NEED Excel" and "I need to read Excel files therefore I need a program that can work with that file format". Sad but true, many technology decisions are made by senior management based on the marketing blurb, not on technical merits.
20. anonymous
Despite all the sniping at MS, the basic premise is true - the majority of opensource projects are producing clones of existing products.
MS does it's own share of cloning, but it does also innovate (.Net, C#, tablets, etc) even if it is largely through the acquisition of other companies.
21. AndyD
.NET & C# innovative? I don't think so. The whole idea existed in UCSD P-System decades ago and with Java later. C# was written by a guy Microsoft poached from Borland because Delphi blew both VC++ and VB into the weeds in terms of flexibility and productivity. If innovation means using huge financial resources to buy other technology and present it as your own then MS is innovative.
22. Andy Fox
And so the ‘great debate’ (boring waffle) continues.
IT does not drive the business world, as much as it likes to think it does, business drives the IT world. Ultimatly businesses will continue to purchase from high profile and stable businesses. Think about it… do you buy your corporate hardware from the likes of the mighty Dell and HP or do you go to ‘Fred Bloggs PC’s Ltd’? What is your Answer and why? If you take more than 2 seconds to answer this then your probably better suited to a career in the food service or clensing industry than in IT. Noone outside the IT industry really gives a damn about 'The Great Debate' its just the usual 'IT nerd' claptrap that has surfaced yet again and will continue to do so every light news month
23. E
Surely you jest...C# an innovation?? I admit the name is catchy but Microsoft never met a standard (ANSI C) or successful product that they didn't somehow want to own or control.
Frankly, Microsofts pathetic desire to be all things to all people at a hefty price is wearing me out. I'm already using Openoffice and I'm centimeters away from switching to Linux. Already started testing it on the desktop.
24. Smithy
Simon Cox : <i>"Ballmer is obviously being backed into a corner and is trying to worry IT managers into staying with MS again. "</i>
Microsoft is backed into a corner huh?
Let me see..
Microsoft has had RECORD sales in every single quarter for the last 24 months, including Microsoft's first ever 10 Billion dollar quarter in December 2003!
Microsoft Windows server has its highest market share ever at over 55%!
Microsoft has over 96% of the world's desktops, that is over 96 times the share of Linux.
Microsoft Windows storage software has captured over 45% of the storage software market after just 2 years on the market!!
Microsoft made more money in the first week of this year than all the Linux companies in the world combined!
Microsoft also has to the tune of $56 billion in the bank!
If you call that being "backed into a corner" then please back me nto that corner quick!
I could use some $56 Billion! LOL!
Wake up and smell the coffee dude!!
Microsoft simply ROCKS! Just try getting used to that will you? :)
25. anonymous
Bill is the Messiah.. not God.. just to correct an earlier corresponant. Ok. You seen Omen? 2nd coming.. ho ho..
26. anonymous
Linux and Macs are garbage, just copying all Microsofts brilliant ideas. Linus Torvald is the anti christ...But Bill is there shining his light..come on..follow the light and righteous path..resist this open source evil. just say no...
27. Steve Bailey
"MS does it's own share of cloning, but it does also innovate (.Net, C#, tablets, etc) even if it is largely through the acquisition of other companies."
Er... NO! .Net, effectively a clone of the Java Virtual machine technology. C#, a clone of Java itself, as for Tablets, well they're being "innovated" by many companies out there.
28. Jamie Bishop
Simon wrote: "I've tried to keep their dominance out from my employer"
Your employer is probably interested in profit and minimizing costs. That'll be why he has chosen Microsoft.
The interesting thing about the comments on this subject is the passion with which people speak, and perhaps that explains why open source is struggling to compete. The succesful decision makers in industry do not allow their passion to influence their profits, not unless they believe it will increase it.
29. Carl Maycock
Interesting MS support! Microsoft have the huge market share based upon one simple premise. Marketing. If Microsoft can be applauded for anything it is that they have managed to associate computing with the MS moniker. As one of the earlier comments mentioned most IT decisions are made by finance people ultimately, and they are only familiar with MS products. Ask most people in a company to name a rival office product to Microsoft Office and they can't. This does not mean that Microsoft are innovative with their software just shrewd.
30. Graham
I think it's tragic that from a whole host of comments there are about 3 sensible ones. Microsoft is dominant because they are the best. Simple. Is that dodgy business? No, it's just that nobody else compares. And of course they get their new ideas from research done by other people as does just about everybody else in the known world - there are only a very few true innovators and they are so focused on 'innovating' they cannot get around to delivering. Plus multiple suppliers suck as none will admit being at fault and always blame either OS or apps, depending on their (opposite) area of responsibility. MS are highly exposed and deliver effective support.
Business requires cheap effective SW - have you seen the price for an enterprise linux install recently? How many people do you know that truly understand Linux inside and out - it takes about 30 minutes to become aquainted with any MS product because they offer consistency. .Net innovative? Who cares? It enables rapid development and that is the key.
I suspect a lot of the respondents here where some very flattering chunky sweaters, sport out of control beards and just love the feeling of socks in sandals.
31. Goten Xiao
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't almost the entirety of the NT kernel written by someone NOT working for Microsoft, then hired jsut before they ahd finished?
One of the main complaint I hear whenever I mention Linux/Unix/Macs is "There's nothing for it". The Win32 API is almost a monopoly on the programming industry - how many games were developed for the Linux kernel first? How many major software companies (i.e. Quicken, Norton) develop for Linux at all?
Microsoft have led everyone into a deep pit, and they're slowly pouring cement in.
32. Smithy
Varl Maycock screeches: "Microsoft have the huge market share based upon one simple premise. Marketing"
Rubish!
IBM spends more on marketing than Microsoft ever has, with IBM having over THREE times the sales of Microsoft.
IBM has run MASSIVE commercials at the Super Bowl every single year for the past three years, shilling for Linux. Microsoft has yet to run even a single Super Bowl ad, yet Microsoft continues to smoke Linux , garneshing virtusally the whole of the world's desktop software, and winning most of the world's serer software as well.
If people bought software because of "marketing" as you put it, why is IBM and Linux not on top today then, since IBM is over three times the size of Microsoft and is spending billions of dollars every single year promoting Linux in every single IBM ad?
Despite what you think, consumers are not stupid. Consumers will buy software that serves their needs, has a lower learning curve, is easy to use, has all the vital software and applications they need, and is priced within their means (unlike CRAPPLE computers which still cost over 50% more than Windows computers).
You want to take out Windows? You gotta bring something that is much better than Windows (NOT Linux which clearly is the most user unfriendly software on the planet), and an OS that has all the vital applications and games etc that users need.
The only software that meets all the needs of consumers right now continues to be Windows.
Windows is gonna continue to rule for the forseeable future.
Let's face it, we have had predictions from the crazy open source arnachists like forever about how they were going to take Windows out first in 1999, then 2000, then 2001, 2002 2003 etc etc. Meanwhile Windows continues to clobber Linux with a solid over 96% of the desktop market.
Its become the biggest standing joke in techdom!
33. Steve Berry
Following on from the last comment, fairly obvious recent example of that was MSs acquisition of Connectix at the tail-end of last year ( cos' they couldn't get VMWare ).
There' ya' go, get the product, slap the MS badge on it, allocate dev resources if need be to *appear* to make it competitive and flog it to those who don't really know (or most likely care) where it came from.
I'd love someone to actually do a survey someday of all the stuff on MSDN to find out how much of it was actually developed by MS bods vs how much obtained by acquisition.
Not alot methinks.
Does anyone actually take what *anyone* else in this industry says seriously anymore or are we gonna' wake up and realise that the Corp American way in alopt of cases is just one big joke !
34. anonymous
I have successfully ran open source software. I find more great things in Windows than on open source products. It appears to me that the open source community keeps try to bring attention to themselfs because they can not make it. I have done several test that show that Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 out perform linux machines. My College has also done test proving the same thing. Open source software waste more time setting it up most of the time that it wastes people time. Even the people whom write the code into open source software are not even paid, or not even paid much. The best thing about open source software is that I can take there source code and create a program on a windows machine sell it and make it my own. Thanks Open Source Software you made me money. Only by stealing your code....
35. anonymous
Seems to me that Microsoft themselves can't inovate - anything they want to branch out into they just buy out the appropriate company (eg Visio)- the trouble with Linux is they can't buy it outright. They can't challenge a single company, it's a diverse and constantly shifting global community, look what's happened to SCO trying to do that. Having been a Linux user for 8 years now, domestically and in enterprise (yes - that's ENTERPRISE) level critical systems they just run and run, no virus problems, no software crashes, no license lock-ins, the techies love it, and we can safely ignore it at let it do it's job while we spend our time bodging - sorry - 'patching' up the Windows systems, virus protecting them and spend all out cash on CALS (license to print money!) and stupid licensing. I think Balmer needs to come back down to reality.
36. Carl Maycock
Interesting perspective Smithy. I didn't mention the amount of money Microsoft spend on marketing. And I also didn't attribute Microsoft's success to the amount they spend. I simply stated the Microsoft were successful at marketing. Just spending X amount of money doesn't mean that you guarantee success. Microsoft's history is generally not of innovation but assimilation. They take existing code to start with and rebrand it. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but it costs money. Open source until recently didn't have this luxury and as such has a history of creating code from the ground up. Five minutes on a web browser will show you the truly mind boggling amount of code being generated by open source communities. Also a huge amount being driven by desire to innovate. As there is no real financial incentive for these projects one would assume that innovation must be a key reason.
37. Smithy
Carl Maycock whines : "Interesting perspective Smithy. I didn't mention the amount of money Microsoft spend on marketing."
Did you mention dollar amounts spent on marketing? Nope.
Is that relevant at all? Nope.
Did you clearly state that Microsoft has huge market share due to just one thing, that one thing being marketing? Oh yes you did!
What is marketing but marketing dollars?
If IBM, which has THREE times the sales of Microsoft is spending three times the marketing dollars that Microsoft does, and running what everyone is calling some of the best Superbowl ads shilling for Linux for three straight years, and outmarketing Microsoft in every department going flat out promoting Linux, and Microsoft Windows still continues to totally clobber Linux on both the desktop ( Windows 96%) and servers (Windows 55%), its gotta be something a darn site more than marketing, doesn't it?
You open-source, American hating Euro-nuts will work your butts off to cliam that Microsoft is successful because of men from Mars or whatever, the facts just don't suport your wild claims.
Microsoft has done very little marketing for Windows XP this year, certainly much less marketing than IBM is doing for Linux, meanwhile Windows XP is still outselling Linux by at least 90 to 1.Consumers CHOOSE Microsoft products when they go out to buy PC's and PC software, because Microsoft software is simply the best at meeting consumers needs. Period!
Get used to that will you?
BTW, more marketing dollars DOES mean better marketing. You buy the best talent on Mdison Avenue for your marketing, the more you pay, and the best TV and print spots for your marketing too.
You should go study marketing 101, dude!
38. Smithy
Goten Xiao cliams :"Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't almost the entirety of the NT kernel written by someone NOT working for Microsoft, then hired jsut before they ahd finished? "
That's easily done. You ARE completely WRONG in your speculation.!
NT was completely written INSIDE Microsoft by Microsoft programmers. Period!!
If you want to read a very good book about how NT was written, go read "Show Stopper" written by G. Pascal Zachary (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0029356717/qid=1089896423/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0167767-0373538?v=glance&s=books).
It will tell you exactly how NT was written and remove those false notions from your mind (hopefully).
39. Carl Maycock
Yes Smithy. Very American perspective you have there. Is it possible for you to discuss these matters without refering to people as Euro nuts ? Thank you for re-iterating what I was refering to. Namely that even though IBM spend far more than Microsoft and have larger sales they still do not have the same market dominance. MS have waged a very clever and successful marketing campaign without spending as much as big blue etc.The argument that MS provide better consumer satisfaction is hard to argue with except for the fact that most consumers only know windows. Most consumers have never used anything other than Windows so how would one asses whether customer satisfaction is better than a MAC or even SUSE ? Having used MS and Linux I can say that both have advantages and disavantages. In my experience people use Windows because it's either sold with their PC or because they simply do not know they can use anything else. People who use Linux or MAC do so because they choose that OS. I use Windows and Linux on my Laptop. I use windows because it shipped with it and Linux because I want it on my laptop.
40. Simon Blackham
"Linux is the most user unfriendly software...". When you last used Linux at the desktop, the unfriendly interface you used was? The average user does not 'use' Linux (or Windows), he uses the 'Windows Manager' to run his applications.
When we used unix (or other O/Ss)in the past with a text shell, the last the user saw of the O/S was the login.
The reason why Linux (and others) are having a hard time is the too complex and unfamiliar window managers and the lack of ported software. PlayStations are winning the console market(?) currently because you can buy and use the games you want on it, not because Sony owns it - what happened to SEGA? Put the right applications on anything and it will win! People used to 'hate' IBM as much as they now 'hate' Microsoft.
Linux/Samba/Cups(maybe) makes a good server - we also use KDE and Webmin to control it but the client desktop is predominantly Windows 95-Xp and will probably remain so. We have some users using Linux desktops with OpenOffice but they will probably remain a small exception until Microsoft crash!
41. anonymous
Whoever posted this must be a f*ck-head. Linux and Macs are not shit they are very goos OS's. Windows is the most garbage-like operating system. Do Mac's and comp's running Linux crash as often, need as many updates, get as many viruses? No. But you dont see us bitching about it.
42. Jonathan Bengtson
Smithy wrote, "You should go study Marketing 101, dude."
Smithy is confusing advertising dollars with marketing tactics. Tactics like buying or cloning all your competitors and forcing computer sellers to include Word if they want to ship Windows at a reasonable price.
43. Benny
What would Balmer do if he was up against MS?
It's all very well dismissing open source as "cloning" existing software when you are number 1 but what would Balmer suggest they do?
Companies and people have a lot of processes and data that are tied into MS software already, if someone wanted to compete realistically their offerings would have to support what is already in place and be able to take over from it with the minimum of fuss. I can't see another way of doing this without "cloning", can you?
44. anonymous
Pot/Kettle.
If you take money out of the equation (and for MS, money truly is NO object), how is what he's accusing open source of different to using your HUGE investment capital to buy up competitors left, right and centre?
The other cliche that springs readily to mind is "Live by the sword, die by the sword."
Give it time.
45. anonymous
Microsoft can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all the people all the time.
Microsoft got it's market share by forcing PC assemblers to only load Windows if they wanted Windows at a decent price, or at all. Then Microsoft used proprietary formats to lock in users, and topped it off by changing the format for each version so you had to upgrade so you could read the new format.
So if you want to keep topping up Microsofts bank account keep buying it, but if you want to get out of vendor lock in go open source. More companies are supplying Linux drivers so Linux is getting closer to being a replacement for Windows.
46. Nunuv Yurbiz
Kudos for open source! At least we know what we're getting into.
When is MS going to stand behind ITS software? Currently, we pay to Beta test every new MS system (Win ME for Maximum Errors, XP for eXtra Problems.)
47. anonymous
Open Source will not be open source forever. Look what happended to Red Hat Linux. Its only a matter of time before open source will not be 'open source'. Wake up...people want to make money and unfortunatly some are greedy.
48. anonymous
Open Source will not be open source forever. Look what happended to Red Hat Linux. Its only a matter of time before open source will not be 'open source'. Wake up...people want to make money and unfortunatly some are greedy.