Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by nitrogen 1678 days ago
None of those examples have anything to do with "embrace, extend, extinguish"?

They all do. IE is eee of HTML and the web. MS Java and VisualJ or whatever it was called was eee of Sun Java. ActiveX was eee of the web browser.

That wasn't Microsoft's choice, that's just de-facto reality

That's what BG said in his deposition, but MS was the only company who embedded IE into the OS to make ActiveDesktop and put VBScript and ActiveX into IE.

Java was never a Windows replacement.

AWT and Swing and browser applets were Windows replacements.

Instant messaging died out due to Facebook/Snapchat/Twitter/Slack/etc.

You're talking about things that happened ten years later. There was a time when one app would connect to every network.

Google dominates email, not MS/hotmail.

MS Exchange dominates email.

2 comments

>They all do. IE is eee of HTML and the web. MS Java and VisualJ or whatever it was called was eee of Sun Java. ActiveX was eee of the web browser.

All of those efforts failed miserably. They have nothing to do with the actual reasons why Netscape died, why Firefox is trending down, why Java never became dominant, why Open/LibreOffice never replaced MS Office, why open chat protocols were replaced by chat services from Google, Facebook, Discord and Slack, why Java applets never caught on, etc.

All of those efforts failed miserably.

The grandparent comment is right on the money with "You're assuming the goal of these things was to replace the product, when the goal was to destroy the competitor."

MS bought at least 10-15 years of dominance with EEE, vaporware, and other anticompetitive practices.

Just like Google killed RSS with Reader.

Just like Facebook bought WhatsApp and Instagram to avoid them potentially growing into replacements for Facebook.

The goal was to kill or delay an upstart that would distract users away from their core products, not to produce a successful competitor to the upstart.

Netscape

Netscape no doubt had its own problems, but MS deeply embedding IE into Windows 98 was a huge part of them.

Java

Actually Java was pretty dominant. Interactive web was either Flash or Java. If it was for entertainment, it was Flash, if it was for work or computation, it was Java.

Open/LibreOffice

Have you forgotten WordPerfect?

WordPerfect lost to Word for the exact same reason Lotus 1-2-3 lost to Excel. They were extremely late to the transition to GUIs. By the time they had Windows versions, the world had already switched.

Java was never widely deployed on the web. The only services that ever used applets in any meaningful way were a handful of Asia-only banks. Applets were stillborn for a large number of reasons, all of which you can blame on Sun.

MS giving away IE for free torched Netscape's business model, but that seems like a strange objection - we all expect browsers to be free (and built into the OS) today.

They were extremely late to the transition to GUIs. By the time they had Windows versions, the world had already switched.

In the case of WordPerfect, what I recall reading was that this was in small part because WP kept writing everything in pure assembly language for way too long, and in large part because MS gave Word a leg up with internal Windows APIs. This was raised in one of the antitrust suits against MS, but I don't recall which one. Either way, I had used a GUI WYSYWIG version of WordPerfect (for DOS) long before I'd ever even seen MS Word of any form.

Java was never widely deployed on the web.

This is a point that would have to be settled by numbers, and I don't have them. What I do know is that every simple web-based calculator app was written in Java, and that in my circles installing Java was one of the first things one did after installing Windows and a browser.

we all expect browsers to be free (and built into the OS) today.

I think this was a mistake. All that "you're a feature, not a product" nonsense is a distraction from the insane degree of consolidation we've tolerated in technology. There should be thousands of billion dollar tech companies each serving in interoperable niches, not a handful of trillion dollar tech companies.

You can't blame MS for WordPerfect's failure. This story repeats ad infinitum - WordPerfect had a large body of users who had already memorized the alt-shift-F8 combos and didn't want change. They were in no hurry to alienate their established base. Microsoft gets credit here, they saw the future that WordPerfect and Lotus didn't.

Name one widely used (in the west) website that used Java applets. I can name exactly one, because I worked on the backend for it, but even in 2002 everyone knew it was an odd duck. Flash was still popular, activex still around, but ajax was a thing and everyone knew it was the future. Applets were a joke.

The market doesn't really care about your opinion of what is/isn't a mistake. Sorry.

They introduced Win95 and would not allow WordPerfect access until it was public while building office which meant it took them 6 months to port over to windows 95. WordPerfect wasn't able to recover.

Popcan was huge with multi-player games.

Microsoft gets no credit for these tactics.

> All of those efforts failed miserably.

To this day:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_compatibility_issues_in_So...

There was a period in the early 2000s where that was everywhere, and that was when Netscape died.

Causing intentional problems with non-Microsoft Office products on Microsoft operating systems is what caused everyone to get locked into Microsoft Office file formats.

Microsoft successfully suppressed Java for long enough for Sun to die.

You can't just say "no it isn't" and make it otherwise.

> Causing intentional problems with non-Microsoft Office products on Microsoft operating systems is what caused everyone to get locked into Microsoft Office file formats.

So it's like Google making their services slow on Firefox? History repeats itself, only the names are different.

It's tiresome refuting misinformation like this point by point, so I'll just pick the one I have deep knowledge of:

> Microsoft successfully suppressed Java for long enough for Sun to die.

Tell me, how did Microsoft "suppress" Java? The main contention of Sun's lawsuit is that Microsoft was harming Java by adding features (most notably, delegate - ie closures). That almost nobody used. I know, I used them. There's no meaningful interpretation of the word "suppress" that applies here.

Furthermore, Java was always a cost center for Sun. There is no alternate history where Java somehow saved Sun. They made their money from selling hardware that eventually nobody bought.

Set aside your blind hate and learn from people that actually worked with these technologies in that era.

I can only speak as a SysAdmin at the time. There where sites/applets that did only run in IE with MSs version of Java and sites/applets that only run with Suns Java. I remember having to create different desktop shortcuts for differently configured browsers. That (plus the long startup time of the odd Java based sysadmin-tool) lead to a general feeling of "Java == Bad". Which shined through to invitation to tender. No mater whether the subject had anything to do with something user facing.
Tell me, how did Microsoft "suppress" Java?

One way to suppress something is by diluting it or distracting from it with a bunch of slightly different options. Kind of like the spoiler effect in first-past-the-post elections.

"MS Java and VisualJ or whatever it was called was eee of Sun Java."

You mean C#?

C# was part of what survived all of that, but I mean MS's original forays into Java.

E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_J%2B%2B#Sun's_litigatio...