Adobe-Microsoft Collision Course
|
Once close partners, Adobe and Microsoft increasingly vie for the same enterprise customers. A colossal collision is inevitable. |
Perhaps in a parallel universe, Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen and Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates are bosom buddies. In that universe, Microsoft is the preeminent provider of operating systems for all kinds of devices, and Adobe is the major developer of software for Microsoft platforms. The two companies engage in a rich collaboration that benefits consumers and enterprises alike.
This universe's reality is harsher. Microsoft chose to develop applications along with operating systems, creating constant tension with many of its development partners. Microsoft now competes with many Windows developers, largely because of its applications business.
Adobe, which long had been a showcase Windows developer, is one of Microsoft's fiercest competitors. Someday, the Andromeda and Milky Way galaxies will collide. Today, Adobe and Microsoft are galaxies colliding in the enterprise.
This week's Adobe Max event and Microsoft's .Net code licensing are indicators of the fierce competition among the two companies.
Adobe is not a .Net shop, and the company sells developer tools that compete with others from Microsoft. I've heard some Adobe employees wonder if the increased competition is in part because the company isn't a .Net fanboy. There might be more room for both companies in the enterprise, if Adobe—one of the largest Windows developers other than Microsoft—fully supported .Net in its enterprise applications.
For some people at Microsoft, Adobe's lack of loyalty is probably seen as betrayal and the first step toward increased competition. If Adobe wouldn't support .Net enterprise applications, Microsoft could, would and did.
But the story's plot is more complex than .Net support. Microsoft has long struggled to get businesses to deploy newer versions of Office. There is a tendency among enterprises to skip versions or run multiple versions of Office rather than to move wholesale to the newest product. As such, Microsoft has sought to expand Office's reach beyond the desktop, into new informational and businesses categories and to server software. Interestingly, Microsoft has chosen to advance into many of the same areas as Adobe.
At the turn of the century, there was little product or line-of-business overlap between Adobe and Microsoft. In 2000, Adobe was a trusted, longstanding Microsoft partner. But by Microsoft's 2003 product release cycle, much had changed. Competition increased on many fronts. Today, it's hard to identify a product or business category where Adobe and Microsoft don't compete. I once heard an Adobe product manager say that he felt like Microsoft had painted a big target symbol on his head.
Product overlap is now enormous, as both companies push into areas in the enterprise where there won't be room enough for two giants. The differences between the competitors are as much, perhaps more, philosophic as business or technological. Adobe's disloyalty, which really is just loyalty to its customers, is a major reason. Adobe has chosen a multi-platform business, development and product path, which is a major reason for the lack of real .Net development support. The company has come to stand at the vanguard of open development—in part because of its support for Java, Java EE and other non-Microsoft development tools—even though its business isn't open source and the products are commercially released.
Something else: Adobe threatens Office, because of the ubiquity of PDF. Office success hinges in part on the control of file formats. Pervasive use of PDF, which is largely platform independent and supports collaboration, editing and sharing tools, competes with Office file formats. Are businesses replacing Office with Acrobat? I doubt many are. But enterprises might not be as quick to deploy newer versions of Office, because of PDF tools and the ubiquity of access. Microsoft counts competition in lost revenue, rather than lost market share.
Deploying either company's products shouldn't have to be an either or decision, but there isn't necessarily room for the two among many enterprises. For example, how many editing or collaboration systems would any enterprise really want to have? Then there is the push from both companies—but more from Microsoft—around integrated desktop-server suites of products. Additionally, Microsoft doesn't play for second place.
During this week's Max 2007 conference, Adobe announced some exciting new collaboration, development and Web rich media tools. Microsoft is moving into the same categories and more. Collision is inevitable. The challenge for IT organizations: Being spectators rather than getting caught in the crash.
Comments (12)
Micro$oft doesn't have any loyalty to its partners. These are all tactical alliances. The company has stabbed others in the back before, so this isn't the least bit surprising. Micro$oft will do it again.
Posted by Maddog | October 4, 2007 3:55 PM
I find it very interesting that for almost two decades, MSFT has not offered anything for serious page layout and publications, and Adobe has never tried its hand with a word processing app or spreadsheet.
It makes you wonder, is there a mutual agreement between the two companies to stay off the other's "turf"?
Posted by JCG | October 4, 2007 4:26 PM
Any kind of product or server Microsoft makes, you name it, BizTalk, MOM, SharePoint, VS, Media Player and many many more expose a framework that can be used by Vendors or Partners to extend the functionality and give more value to it. This extensible model that Microsoft consistenly, follows has created huge businesses for thousands of small to mid size companies and created a powerful ecosystem unparralled and unmatched by any other company that benefit all parties.So let's not generalize about Microsoft and partner loyalty.
Posted by evan | October 4, 2007 4:50 PM
Joe, congrats- your catching up, your only hours behind now instead of months, weeks and days! NDA's are an inconvienance. imo-lol
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_A/threadview?m=tm&bn=328&tid=40565&mid=40565&tof=2&frt=2
This shows Adobe has the goods and is the real threat to Microsoft just as we theorized. (Not rated) 4-Oct-07 11:36 am Like hawcreek and original_al said, one or two little posters can't perform a "pump and dump". If this were a true pump and dump the "Meet and Confer" PR Monday would have been followed up by all sorts of fluff PRs.
Instead, VCSY puts out that one PR and goes silent again waiting for the court sessions next week.
BUT, that doesn't mean the outfits they've got friends who appear to be using evaluation versions of their patents. This one Adobe we've been watching for a while. One of the stunning phrases in the VCSY patents is the one which eludes to not needing "programmers" to build applications.
Web designers are not going to be happy about this. Developers are going to be begging Microsoft for work and everybody will have gone to the 'Thermo' idea which is as close to a public 744/521 scheme as I can see.
The fact thermo needs no programming is a keyword intended to jab Microsoft right in the ribs. Poor Microsoft shareholders are going to get raped by their own inept management.
I think we saw Microsoft send out their read-only .Net code to make them look "transparent" while they keep their API's (where the real work would be done in an infringing architecture) locked up tight. No doubt that's where VCSY's lawfirm Niro and his experts will be demanding discovery.
Posted by I-Man | October 4, 2007 5:36 PM
Adobe a Microsoft partner? When nearly 50 percent of their revenue comes from the Mac platform? Interesting. Seems OS X is a way for Adobe to leverage their products with designers (many more use Mac in proportion to business users) to beat Microsoft.
If a Mac developer wants to develop for Silverlight the only tool available is a text editor. Thus, flash has one big leg up on Silverlight. Not to mention Flash is a much more mature technology. Microsoft has one big achilles heel. Their Windows-centric ways.
If Adobe's smart, and continues to make world-class tools like Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, Flash, and have their technologies on the majority of the world's computers (Flash is on 95 percent, Acrobat on the vast majority) this is not really a fight. Microsoft has little hope of unseating them.
All this noise about Microsoft and Adobe competing. Well, it goes without saying that Adobe can't rest. They have to work hard to stay ahead. But it's their war to lose. Microsoft hasn't a prayer of unseating them, no matter how hard they try.
Posted by Eric | October 4, 2007 5:59 PM
Adobe needs to get with the act and FIX its clunky Reader. It also needs to properly get with the web in such a way that it can harmoniously interact with a web browser. I am sick sick sick of clicking on weblinks and finding that I am taken to a single page PDF or a multipage PDF whose navigation is completely at odds with browser navigation.
Posted by Chilln | October 4, 2007 6:27 PM
You forgot another one Joe:
Microsoft Office InfoPath vs. Adobe LifeCycle Forms
Posted by Andre Da Costa | October 4, 2007 9:23 PM
Joe , you wrote : "because the company isn't a .Net fanboy. " . Please be reminded to choose and use wording carefully
Fanboy is relate to obession . I am a .NET programmer but I am not a .Net fanboy.
But you can affirm that I-Man is a VCSY fanboy
Posted by John | October 4, 2007 9:55 PM
I think you hit the nail on the head when saying that Adobe's lack of .net in their programs is the reason MS is invading these markets. Basically Adobe is trying to invade ms's frameworks and programming initiative so in turn MS is making similar products that showcase them. You can't really blame either company but I do think that if they would work together software programs would be the main beneficiary.
Posted by Jesse | October 5, 2007 11:02 AM
isn't this odd? Maybe they need to put Adobe's face on a milk carton.
http://java.sys-con.com/read/434379.htm
Adobe Was Missing at AJAXWorld!
Adobe goes 'mssing in action' at one of the most significant rich web app shows of the year
By: James Hamilton
Sep. 26, 2007 07:45 PM
James Hamilton's Blog
Today is my second day at the AJAXWorld conference in Santa Clara, California. Compared to last year, the expo floor seems to have more than doubled with new sponsors and exhibitors displaying their latest rich Web technologies. There have also been a lot of product announcements at the show.
An InfoWorld article says Nexaweb Hails Mashups, and a ComputerWorld article says OpenAjax Alliance Hails Mashups. Everyone seems to be hailing mashups at this year's AJAXWorld. Now that the valuation metrics changed for startup companies who are getting ready for their big payoff day (like Zimbra's 350M score last week), any buzzword associated with a bleeding-edge technology company can affect those valuations big time. I completely agree with Doug Levine on this new era of valuations.
There was another interesting announcement from Microsoft yesterday about Astoria Web Services. Actually there has been a lot of press around AJAXWorld this year, but the buzz on the expo floor is "Whatever happened to Adobe?"
One attendee I was talking to last night at the opening reception said Adobe was also missing in action last week at the Gartner show. Microsoft announces Silverlight, and Adobe goes "missing in action" at one of the most significant rich Web app shows of the year. It is interesting, very interesting indeed.
Posted by I-Man | October 6, 2007 11:19 AM
It always gives me a chuckle to see all the "experts" complaining and asking where the money is for all these things. Have you seen how many Adobe projects there are? Adobe is in open beta with their products. That means no money changes hands. Get it? As long as the product is in an evaluation stage, nobody pays for it and no revenue changes hands. The force of law and damaged industry reputation to those who would try to usurp legal ownership of technology is what holds the ownership issues in place for the technology originators.
Bankers and stock traders can't conceive of such an arrangement. Why would you ever let people use your stuff and not pay for it?
Because software, especially development software, is used to build other software products. And entirely new software that has never appeared before always goes through trial periods allowing users to pre-use the products and technologies to evaluate the value to all concerned.
If the stuff turns out to not have value, the evaluation is terminated and that is that. If the stuff turns out to have value, the evaluation period is finished and the value is exchanged.
So... where are all these developers getting this Adobe AIR product that looks so much like patent 521 without any revenue coming to VCSY? Beta evaluations.
What about DB2 9 Viper? The Viper campaign is scheduled to be finished "by the end of this year" according to IBM. As long as Viper is a codename, the product is a beta product for evaluation.
And why "by the end of this year"? By the end of the upcoming discovery discussions, we will all be able to see just where VCSY will be allowed to look in the Microsoft vault. That will tell industry watchers just what chance Microsoft has and the ownership of the 744 patent will be a foregone conclusion.
If Microsoft wants to slug it out to the trial, that's Microsoft's prerogative. If the rest of the industry wants to ship for sale the products they've been using in beta evaluations? That's their prerogative. And the resulting value demonstrated by many users of those products will be self-evident.
Then, VCSY can demonstrate to the court just how much damage has been done to VCSy by being forced to hold their products in abeyance while attempting to determine the actual ownership as contested by the largest software entity in the industry, Microsoft.
So, harangue away, all you open-source hounds and Microsoft gnashers and MS partners who think other peoples' software technologies belong to you because you're the largest. Harangue away.
One day the valuation will have to be tallied, and the amount of time VCSY has been forced to stay in the shadows will be caluclated against the amount of money MSFT made off of .Net with their clients and partners. And all that will be measured against the demonstrated evaluations by the various VCSY industry friends and their partnering developers... all evaluated by metrics derived by open betas and partnering evaluations... all while Microsoft holds their betas in private and gives their development secrets to secret partners.
Yep. It's quite an interesting position to find Microsoft in these days. Right when they should be shipping their XML vision as proposed by Bill Gates years ago, they have to slink around and hope no journalists poke too hard.
It's funny. Just damn funny. That the largest software company in the world has to hide and limit themselves to quiet blog announcements and "rumors".
And all their sycophants and party platforms can do is gush about how much money Microsoft has.
well, I'm gushing about how much money Microsoft has as well. If the Eolas capability was worth enough for a jury to say $521+million, it's a good thing Microsoft has billions. They're going to need it.
Wait for the trial? Why wait? VCSY can sell their products as soon as the court tells Microsoft the extent to which VCSY can perform discovery on Microsoft's electronic records and projects and products.
Posted by I-Man | October 6, 2007 5:04 PM
Funny. Silverlight is a web-killer and not a Flash wannabe. Flash and Silverlight are not the same.
I am working hard to remove all Adobe products from all of my systems. Why? Highly unstable products.
Posted by Alan Churchill | October 7, 2007 9:45 PM