Virtual PC and the Value of Free
|
Yesterday's release of Virtual PC 2007 continues a longstanding Microsoft trend: Give away free something valuable to gain market share against a dominant competitor. |
Other recent pricing low-balls or giveaways include Office Accounting Express and Visual Studio Express. Microsoft can so blatantly undercut competitors, because its larger objective is to make gains for other products, typically Office and Windows and more recently Windows Server.
The tactic doesn't always succeed, and Microsoft must build a supporting network, typically with partners. But Microsoft's notches in the win column far exceed those in the loss column.
Give It Away to Take It Away
Many factors account for Microsoft's success, but two longstanding business practices stand out: release of software that achieves a "good enough" standard and offer of lower-cost, or free software that enhances the value of its platform products like Windows.
When, in the early 1990s, WordPerfect was the dominate word processor, Microsoft responded by bundling together Word, Excel and PowerPoint as "Office." The three products together sold for about the same price as WordPerfect. The lower-cost tactic is most effective when the software is "good enough"—meaning covers the 70 to 80 percent of features most end users would use most of the time.
Microsoft has repeated this pattern over the years. I remember when in the later 1990s, computer stores sold Microsoft's FoxPro for about $100; meanwhile, competing products from companies like Borland sold for many hundreds of dollars more.
"Microsoft is quite willing to go after competitors as a defensive strategy," said Paul DeGroot, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft. WordPerfect and Sony PlayStation are two examples DeGroot cited. "Microsoft takes the long view and bets that it can lose money longer than the other guy."
Lower cost is a good tactic, but Microsoft has done much better with free—and really valuable technology. Probably the best-known example is Internet Explorer, which Microsoft integrated into Windows during the browser wars with Netscape. While Netscape had to separately sell its product, Microsoft could give away its competing software for free. Microsoft regarded its Web browser as adding value to Windows, so it gave away the technology as a way of enhancing the appeal of the operating system and subsequently sales. On the server, Microsoft took on Netscape software by giving away for free FrontPage (for creating Web sites) and Internet Information Server (for hosting Websites).
Windows Media Player is another example. Microsoft invested $500 million developing Windows Media Player 9 Series, which the company gave away for free with Windows XP. Other companies, such as RealNetworks, charged for their digital media products. Microsoft's bundled the software, for free, as way of enhancing Windows' appeal. Like Netscape and other developers, Real had to give away—and open-source—its core digital media technology in response to Microsoft's free software.
"You can even see it with a product like SQL Server, by giving away OLAP," DeGroot said. "It doesn't generate direct revenue for [Microsoft], but it harms Oracle. It used to be a revenue stream for Oracle."
These examples are by no means isolated, nor are they a clean sweep. Microsoft has failed, too, such as search bundling's ineffectiveness against Google.
The Accountant and the Virtual Machine
Office Accounting Express and Virtual PC 2007 are both classic examples of the longstanding Microsoft tactic of giving away something valuable for free.
Virtualization is one of the hottest growth areas on the server and presumably the desktop. Based on research from Gartner, Forrester and IDC, about 75 percent of Fortune 2000 companies now regularly use virtualization on production systems.
Virtual machines let IT organizations run multiple operating systems on a single server. For Microsoft, the opportunity is migration. Many businesses standardize on a single platform or embark on pockets of standardization based on department or function. The result is fragmentation, with many companies running several different versions of Office and Windows. Virtualization allows consolidation on a newer Windows version, while letting an IT organization to maintain compatibility with older applications and desktop or server software.
Conversely, virtualization would let a company switch over to another operating system, say, Linux, while continuing to run older Microsoft software. For obvious reasons, Microsoft would want to mitigate such an occurrence.
Vendors like IBM, VMware or Sun are pushing hard into the virtualization market, where Microsoft is a contender but by no means a leader. Free is Microsoft's calling card to gaining users against more entrenched competitors.
Small business accounting is another example. Yesterday, Microsoft revealed that its free Office Accounting Express 2007 product had achieved 1 million downloads from the IdeaWins Web site. Microsoft is trying to achieve with a free product the success unobtainable from a paid product.
Microsoft released its small business accounting software in late 2005 and started offering the free Express version in October 2006.
Retail sales of Office Accounting 2007 are insignificant compared to entrenched competitor Intuit QuickBooks. While Intuit's product commands more than 90 percent share, as measured in dollars, Microsoft's small business accounting software's share is less than 2 percent, according to NPD.
"Microsoft is really giving a lot of features and functionality to customers for free," said Chris Swenson, NPD's director of Software Industry Analysis. Intuit's entry-level product, QuickBooks Simple Start, costs $99 and has fewer features than Office Accounting Express.
"It's tough to unseat an entrenched competitor like QuickBooks," Swenson said. The free product, with possible upsell to the full product, would appear to be Microsoft's strategy. He described free as an "interesting strategy."
The share gains Microsoft could win from Intuit are more about Office than Office Accounting. The company hopes to upsell small businesses to Office, which applications like Excel and Outlook tightly integrate with the accounting software.
Swenson believes Microsoft must break out its wallet and do some real marketing to really gain market share. Free isn't the right strategy. He observed that Microsoft's first target market is the small business using Excel to keep the books.
"That target market that uses Excel probably never heard of Office Accounting," Swenson said. "The key is awareness and ratcheting it up with marketing."
Comments (37)
do your criticisms hold for other organizations or is it only bad if Microsoft does it? I do have some issues with this argument
Posted by dave | February 21, 2007 1:56 AM
Joe, again , you keeps hammering Microsoft. You leave no stone unturn, even target at free stuff offers by Microsoft.
Why not you give a call to Sun , for their hatred in Microsoft, I am sure that they will employ you
Posted by Joan | February 21, 2007 6:02 AM
Joe, nice job. You have highlighted something that most people don't have awareness of: Microsoft Accounting Express 2007.
I use this free product and...it's a great starter for very small businesses. And...you can't believe how the "FREE" moniker makes it very appetizing. And, it has an Ebay component to post products directly to Ebay.
It's the worlds' best kept secret. And, therein lies your point. Far from MSFT bashing, you make the point that it needs to be marketed! IMHO, you are dead on and doing MSFT a favor by telling them. This isn't the venom of a MSFT hater.
This offering is a great entre to main street businesses. Free accounting plus Office Live is a great door opener. Now, if you can just get the MSFT sales department down out of their ivory towers and pounding the pavement...you'll have success.
Don't kid yourself, this is the best package (Accounting Express 2007 & Office Live) available to mankind. Microsoft just hasn't told anybody; nor have they stitched it together to work properly. Piece by piece...it's awsome!
P.S. - Now that I have praised you considerably understand that I will tear you a new one when I think you are off base.
Posted by Mobutu Ubuntu | February 21, 2007 8:19 AM
Being a developer and trainer I use virtualization products on a daily basis. Not only Virtual PC and Virtual Server are cost-free, but also VMWare has its free product just not to stay behind of Microsoft offer. I am no way an expert in virtualization technology, all I can say that all those products works fine to do my job. I'd greatly appreciate some good comparisons and/or benchmarks MS-VMware running on Windows (yes I know VMware runs on Linux, but it's not an option in my scenario).
Posted by Tod O. | February 21, 2007 9:15 AM
With all of the really BAD/HORRIBLE/VIRUS RIDDEN free software out there (and there are shed loads of it), I just don't get how you can write an article whining that Microsoft is delivering really good free software. Visual Studio Express and Virtual PC are really great examples.
As for Office Accounting, I've never even heard of it, so thanks for pointing that one out. :-)
*Apple includes a whole suite of free products, iLife and development tools with their OS, and their lauded for it. BTW: iTunes pretty much killed all other music players on the Mac market, but I don't remember anyone crying about that...
*Adobe has been giving away Reader for years and no one has a problem with that
*In fact, MOST virtualization products are free as well.
Competition is good.
Please don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Posted by Rob S. | February 21, 2007 10:11 AM
And why does MS VirtualPC 2007 require XP now?!?
The old version worked on Win2K. VMWare works on Win2K. I guess I'm going to switch to VMWare instead of upgrade my install of VirtualPC...
(sticking to Win2K for the lower memory usage and no silly licensing issues when upgrading my motherboard, drives, etc.)...
Posted by Ken Yee | February 21, 2007 10:15 AM
As a matter of truth in advertising, you should change the name of your column "Anti-Microsoft Whine"; because that's what it always is.
Posted by Tom | February 21, 2007 10:35 AM
To all those thinking MS give away products for Free - they don't - well actually they do - but it certainly ain't for charitable purposes.
It doesn't actually matter what the product is - their business goal which overrides everything else has always remained the same - market dominance - vendor lockin - continual upgrade cycles - even if the upgrade is "crap".
"And why does MS VirtualPC 2007 require XP now?!?"
Don't tell me you're surprised by that ! ;)
They want their World on their terms - NOT yours !
It's called business and they've always been pretty good at it.
At least the VMWare product lines are light-years ahead of MSs offerings and they've got market-penetration that MS could only dream about.
Posted by Steve Berry | February 21, 2007 11:10 AM
It's not bad that it's free and working. It's bad because when everybody else is dead, it's going to be double-priced! Morons (or MS-bitches?)
Posted by Dullcho | February 21, 2007 11:47 AM
*Apple includes a whole suite of free products, iLife and development tools with their OS, and their lauded for it. BTW: iTunes pretty much killed all other music players on the Mac market, but I don't remember anyone crying about that...
iLife is $50-80, but it is bundle with some consumer-class Macs. iTunes and Quicktime are free.
Quicktime, similar to Real had to give away the viewer due to WMP. Quicktime pro, which is used for encoding, is $30.
iTunes can be considered a component of the iPod. The software is there to sell the iPod. The iPod/iTunes is bemoaned and lauded all of the time. Best interface on a portable device, and good (but not best) music organizer/store software. Yet the DRM forces consumers to use the iPod with the iTunes store.
I don't think these are reasonable comparisons, to any of the MS examples, except maybe the xbox... but that was a loss on the HW for the long view, not give-away software to sell the overpriced device.
-J
Posted by steve jobs | February 21, 2007 1:24 PM
This article repeats the myth that Microsoft put Netscape out of business by giving away a free browser. Netscape started giving away a free browser before Microsoft ever got in the business. Netscape�s business plan was to give away browsers and sell servers.
Netscape never made any money because the free Apache server was so much better than Netscape�s server and it still is free. It still dominates the server market.
Neither company got the idea that the way to make money on the internet was advertizing. Google won that one�. By giving away stuff for free.
Posted by BillyBrack | February 21, 2007 1:26 PM
Perhaps the biggest giveaway as far as functionality or usefulness is Microsoft's Windows SharePoint Services (not the Portal software). While it comes bundled with Server 2003 it does not require additional software costs and is unbelievably valuable considering it cost. I use it for personal websites and a separate IT department at work. I know the hook is to get people using the free version to spring for the Portal big brother but at only $4K it is still a bargain.
Posted by Jack | February 21, 2007 1:41 PM
This technique of giving away software or charging les than competitors is an old Microsoft trick to kill competition. Once the competitor is dead, MSFT can jack up the price for the now tethered user.
It is called "predatory pricing" and it is illegal, albeit hard to prove in court. The competitors generally do not have the money to take on MSFT in a lawsuit, and DOJ has already had their one shot at MSFT.
There are certainly scholars who believe in a free market, free of anti-trust laws, but there were scholars who defended feudalism. See, e.g., http://www.businessweek.com/1998/47/b3605129.htm for a somewhat balance dscussion of predatory pricing.
Perhaps there will be an affected competitor who has the deep pockets to bloody MSFT's nose for predatory pricing.
Posted by Philip Marcus, J.D. | February 21, 2007 1:51 PM
Giving away Virtual PC is useful to help MS on other fronts. MS now releases certain betas and community tech previews as virtualpc images. That's great since now you don't need to worry about installing the beta of the next Visual Studio on your development machine and have it kill your install of the current Visual Studio. They also provide a special virtualpc image that comes with an activated version of Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 so that developers who have upgraded to IE 7 can perform backwards testing.
The average consumer yells at Microsoft and calls them evil because they throw something away for free and feel as if they are killing the competition. The average consumer also wants those same applications for free as part of Windows. So what if they give VirtualPC away for free. Most of the people I know who would pay for this software will buy other virtual platform software as well. The vast majority of people who will download and use VirtualPC ocassionally wouldn't have paid for it or a competitor anyways.
FYI, your browser analogy is terribly flawed. First off, MS did charge for IE until IE 4. They switched gears mainly because everyone else was giving it away for free. Netscape did start to charge for Navigator, but the real deal was, so what? You could still download it completely for free from Netscape. You never really had to pay for it. Microsoft did not defeat Netscape in the browser wars, Netscape killed themselves. Navigator 3, to me as a developer, was the beginning of the end for them since they had support for HTML 3. The problem is, there is no HTML 3 standard. There was an HTML 3.2 standard, which, of course, Netscape didn't support since they jumped the gun. With the release of Navigator 4 and another jump the gun incompatibility with HTML 4 and some of the worst DHTML functionality it's no wonder they dissappeared.
Posted by Mark | February 21, 2007 1:53 PM
Free is a very good price. That's why I continue to enjoy reading your blogs....it's free. I can choose to continue reading, stop reading (if I feel you're not worthwhile, with no personal loss to me), or perhaps pay someone to read their more worthwhile writing (and then take the risk of paying for something that may become less worthwhile at some point).
The point is, I have a CHOICE to use a free "good enough", stop using the free "good enough" (because it's no longer "good enough"), and then perhaps pay for something that's better than the "good enough".
This brings to mind a network setup/maintenance program that is far superior to the "good enough" network setup/maintenance program in OS X. I'm happy to pay money for this program, because it's worth its cost. It makes network issues, non-issues.
"You can even see it with a product like SQL Server, by giving away OLAP," DeGroot said. "It doesn't generate direct revenue for [Microsoft], but it harms Oracle. It used to be a revenue stream for Oracle." The fact it hurts Oracle is because its product no longer justifies its cost. It's Reagan's "miracle of the market place".
It's easy to put down the "other guy"....which at some point we've all done as children. Those people who whine about the competition should focus on making a better product than the competition does.
Posted by J Ger | February 21, 2007 3:07 PM
"This technique of giving away software or charging les than competitors is an old Microsoft trick to kill competition."
Now I understand what Linux and open-source software is all about! Predatory-very-predatory pricing, tsk tsk...
Posted by Uyke | February 21, 2007 3:58 PM
I'm confused...was Virtual PC just a springboard for another MSFT-specific rant that could be applied to many, many, others (like say IBM contributing most of their UNIX IP for free to OSS in order to hurt MSFT, or GOOG buying up web-office apps and giving them away for the same reason?)? Or did you just forget to come back to it and actually talk about the product beyond listing the industry 001 overview?
Posted by Bob | February 21, 2007 3:59 PM
I remember when Microsoft offered Internet Explorer free, that was a big deal then, but now people just exepect it. Unfortunately writing Windows software now, someone ends up getting hurt and that's anyone who's in Microsoft's line of sight.
I was quietly pleased when IE overtook Netscape at the time just because Netscape didn't look to be making any improvements with their browser(almost like they were being arrogant about things).
What's changed this time is that Microsoft has stifled innovation and now the competition is playing them at their own game, offering software for free and winning. I want to avoid vendor lock-in, and using tools which make me feel like a newbie to programming or to a PC.
Strategically Microsoft are aiming themselves at a wider audience, youth, females, and the computer illiterate people. This is a good thing but I don't fit into that group, every day I get that little bit closer to Linux.
Posted by MonkeyMagic698 | February 21, 2007 5:13 PM
Guys, this is Microsoft Watch. Go and post on Channel9 or MSDN if you cannot stand (or don't believe) that MS abuses its monopoly position.
You will find like minded people who also don't dare question the status quo.
Posted by William | February 21, 2007 6:36 PM
Re: Virtual PC and the Value of Free
To quote:
"Yesterday's release of Virtual PC 2007 continues a longstanding 'Microsoft trend':...."
Maybe I'm missing something here?
I'm neither a Microsoft nor a Linux 'as in free' fanboy but if .... "Give away free something valuable to gain market share against a dominant competitor." is to be the measure by which critics of Microsoft are going to level their dislike or disdain of anything Microsoft does in the marketplace ....
Am I to assume here that Linux/OpenSource developers and companies are not giving away valuable products for 'free' in the hope of gaining market share against (a) dominant competitor(s) ... such as Microsoft??
Posted by SimonMagus | February 21, 2007 6:54 PM
Guys, this is Microsoft Watch. Go and post on Channel9 or MSDN if you cannot stand (or don't believe) that MS abuses its monopoly position.
But this site is more fun to read, with all of completely irrational bashing.
How dare Microsoft give away stuff for free! That's so evil! They're trying to control the world with Virtual PC!
Ha - fantastic.
Posted by Jack Smack | February 21, 2007 7:03 PM
Bashing Microsoft is a religion. If you can't accept, in the absence of all logic, that everything they do is evil - you should be reading MSDN and Channel 9. Take your intelligence elsewhere.
Posted by Reality | February 21, 2007 7:12 PM
Sorry but the places where Microsoft has won with free products is when they were also able to tie that product with Windows. Internet Exporer did poorly until they tied it into Windows and also purchased Netscape contracts from ISPs and then paid them to put MS IE on any existing customers PCs. FrontPage was tied to Windows, Windows Media Player, LookOut and many many others.
They have lost billions on Windows CE and anywhere they can not force OEMs or VARs into pre-installing the Microsoft software, they fail with free.
But, they have a massive monopoly and they use it at every step of the way. Legal issues don't register since by the time anything is even considered, they've won the market.
So, the only way MS VirtualPC is going anywhere is for Microsoft to pre-install it. And the open source market is all over this market too so it's not like anybody is going to get hurt except VMware and what good does that do Microsoft? Now show me where Microsoft is working to eliminate the ability of MS Windows to run in anybody elses VM and THEN you've got a story.
Posted by barney yates | February 21, 2007 7:22 PM
See An Open Letter to Joe Wilcox re Free Microsoft Software
--rj
Posted by Roger Jennings | February 21, 2007 7:42 PM
I have never used Virtual PC and never will. I am a big OpenSource advocate, currently i run Windows XP on my Linux machine (VMware). I know my dad uses Virutal PC at work (programming in Windows 2000) and i have heard that Virutal PC is quite a bit slower than VMware. I haven't tested this so, i don't really know for sure. If someone would like to give some evidence on this, it would be great.
Posted by Stefan | February 21, 2007 8:32 PM
To cut short:
Giving free softwares is the way now. Look at AV, FW, ... All the vendors start to provide free versions, enticing users to switch to the chargeable version for more features.
This is a marketing strategy which many users will agree to. If we like the freeware, we may like the chargeable version (if we need the features).
Posted by Daniel (SG) | February 21, 2007 8:37 PM
Some people don't realize that this predatory pricing is not to just gain market share but to get people to use it because it's "free" and then later when they may need something more advanced, the realization sets in that there is no way to convert your extensive "free" program data to anything but Microsoft. You've been pigeonholed!
Otoh, Open Source software's specs are readily available and that allows for proper import/export filters to be created. In addition, much of the "pay for" software also allows import/export into multiple formats so your data isn't hijacked. Be weary of those "free" apples that Microsoft offers not to mention the fine print disclosures that you agree to in their EULA's as Microsoft can be as predatory as any of the spyware companies! This free isn't the same as Open Source free for sure!
Posted by CB | February 21, 2007 8:55 PM
Yes, the sky is falling. We're all doomed.
Posted by Right | February 21, 2007 9:44 PM
I don't see the Microsoft bashing that many of you seem to read into this article. It seems to me that Mr Wilcox wrote a balanced article on marketing strategy, but the Holy Microsoft Warriors out there are just too anxious to read bashing into everything.
I'm no Microsoft Zombie, nor am I warrior for the penguin god. I just use the most convenient tools at hand.
I would probably be a Linux guy if I was 100% hobbyist, 'cause Microsoft giveth, and Microsoft taketh away. Usually in the same breath. (I could dig out some interesting EULA's from QBasic add-ons.)
But in the world I live in, 99% of my customers use Windows, which means I must be fluent in it.
I now return to my seat along the sidelines of the holy war.
jmk
BTW: I downloaded Virtual PC 2007 yesterday, then sent the link to my friends.
Posted by James K | February 22, 2007 4:34 AM
Back in the '90's, MS and Intuit fought a vicious price war, the price of Money and QuickBooks got down to $13 or there abouts. MS had to surrender, they didn't have the massive Windows/Office cash cow that they have now. A few years later, they tried to buy Intuit (for about $3 billion I think) but were prevented by anti-trust regulations. Now, a decade later, they are at it again.
The reason people hate Microsoft's monopoly is that once they dominate a market, innovation ceases. IE is a classic case - once the browser wars ended, zero new features for nearly a decade. IE 7 still isn't compliant with web standards that MS helped write in 1997.
Windows itself still doesn't have features promised in Windows NT 13 years ago - it seems eye-candy is all that's required. MS kills competition, then just stops bothering to produce better products.
Posted by ozFred | February 22, 2007 7:35 AM
We shouldn't overlook the aggressive packaging of MS SharePoint Portal Services with its Server software, a strategy that has devoured a huge piece of the Portal market share for vendors like IBM, Plumtree, SAP, and Sun.
The more recent area of contention appears to be in the on-line applications arena where Microsoft has pitted its Office Live product against the up-and-coming Google on-line applications such as calendaring and spreadsheets. Lastly I would also keep an eye on the Google Earth -vs- Microsoft Virtual Earth match-up.
Posted by Tom M | February 22, 2007 7:40 AM
Unless we also see the following articles, then this one really is nothing more than a random shot at Microsoft.
"iTunes and the Value of Free"
- Discuss at length how Apple dominates the digital music industry.
"Fedora Core and the Value of Free"
- Red Hat reels people in so they can sell their enterprise products. They recently expanded this tactic to include JBoss.
"MySQL and the Value of Free"
- They're no better than Red Hat.
The list goes on and on - but not in this article. The "analysis" fails to prove that free software is the secret of Microsoft's success.
Posted by Bill Clinton | February 22, 2007 12:44 PM
So, according to this article all Microsoft had to do to win over "office" or any other software is to provide a good enough cheaper alternative.
Well if it's so easy, anybody can win over the market from Microsoft by doing just that. Provide a good enough cheaper alternative...This is simplistic, biased and stupid...
I can name you hundreds of "good enough" alternatives, even from very big software firms, for every single software that microsoft sells and yet they haven not won the market...
Posted by evan | February 22, 2007 12:50 PM
I was reading some video card reviews when I saw a link somewhere on the side to FREE MICROSOFT VIRTUAL MACHINE 2007. I thought, hey it's free, and I never used it. I downloaded it, installed it, and it's great ... well, if I found a practical use for it. I don't use low-tech MAC or Linux.
Posted by Marcin | February 23, 2007 3:33 PM
If this misinformation had been on some silly blog, I wouldn't have bothered, but as it's an official article here I need to keep the record straight:
VMware STARTED to give away their product, giving MS a perfect excuse to do the same!
As for FoxPro pricing or Mediaplayer... Ahh, forget it. Maybe you should join the EU-smart-a**es.
In the future - do your homework! Better still: stop writing.
Regards...
Posted by Xaver | February 26, 2007 4:31 AM
Hey,
You stated that you are for open source. You also state that you like things for FREE? That is great and I agree. I do not understand why you condemn Virtualization? If you are using open source you can install more then one version of your free software on the free virtual platform.....So you only like free software? Must be the case as not virtualizing is giving a bunch of wasted $$$ on hardware you dope.
Posted by Jack | March 5, 2007 11:10 AM
I am doing a series of articles about "free" database software on theOpenSourcery.com - and what readers appear to miss are 4 critical things:
1)Free does not mean Open Source - it is used by many commercial vendors not just Microsoft;
2)Free often means no support or users self support via a forum sponsored by the vendor. But just as often there is no support whatsoever;
3)Free often has feature/functionality constraints and deployment limits as in MS Visual Studio Express or Oracle XE;
4)Free is often used to strike at competitors through the following ploy: I sell two products that frequently get used together; my competitor specializes and sells only one of those products. So I give away the second for free and make it up in incraesed sales and/or prices for the first product.
A prime example is datawarehousing. Microsoft sells SQL Server 2005 but gives away for free an OLAP Server, a data Mining Server, a Report Server, and an ETL Service. Meanwhile BI companies who have no database to sell are seeing there growth rates decline because Microsoft largely is giving away their products for free.
Now just imagine you worked for one of those BI companies. Now just imagine that you attended Tech Ed in 1996 or 1997 when there was a Call to Action on Microsoft's stage to develop BI applications for the upcoming greatly improved SQL Server (at this time Microsoft had no major BI offerings in the market
Now the readership here seems to be appalled that Joe would dare to suggest that these are competitive practices engaged in by Microsoft on a regular basis. But Joe has all the evidence of a 2 year antitrust trial plus payments made by Microsoft to AOL/netscape and Sun for billions to settle lawsuits coming out of that case.
To be sure, Microsoft is not the only software vendor using free to attack its competitors - CA, IBM, Oracle and others have and are currently using such tactics. But they are the leading exponent of free for competitive attack marketing - which is the essence of Joe's argument.
So for the readership to:
a)deny the practice occurs except out of benevolence on the part of Microsoft (or any other vendor);
and b) fail to distinguish the difference between free trials with limited capability or time-to-use or deployment restrictions versus free for perpetuity as in the case of IE and IIS (the latter of which is now no longer free - just try to download IIS for free on the Microsoft website) - this is plain ornery, stubborn if not belligerent short-sightedness.
Posted by Jacques Surveyer | April 18, 2007 4:43 PM