The sincerest form of flattery

In the 1980s, Microsoft created an incompletely successful imitation of Apple's revolutionary graphical user interface.

In 2009, they're copying Apple's hugely successful retail strategy:

Microsoft Corp. said it hired a former Wal-Mart Stores Inc. executive to help the company open its own retail stores, a strategy shift that borrows from the playbook of rival Apple Inc.

The Redmond, Wash., company said it hired David Porter, most recently the head of world-wide product distribution at DreamWorks Animation SKG, as corporate vice president of retail stores for Microsoft.

[...]

The move is a sign of the deeper role consumer-technology companies are playing in the retail business, despite the many risks of straying from their traditional businesses of making hardware and software. Apple, of Cupertino, Calif., encountered widespread skepticism when it first began opening its own retail stores in 2001.

Eight years later, though, Apple's chain of more than 200 stores around the world are widely credited with helping the company boost sales of its Mac, iPod and iPhone product lines. The Apple stores, with their eye-catching architecture, highly-trained sales staff and "genius bars" that provide technical support, gave Apple a way to showcase its products in an environment where they weren't lumped in with a gamut of other electronics items. Sony Corp. and Bose Corp. also operate their own stores.

Microsoft to open stores, hires retail hand (Wall Street Journal, 13 February 2009)

Just a glutton for punishment, I guess

But VMware Fusion makes this very safe and relatively painless...

Guess we'll give Windows 7 a test drive.

Microhoo. Yahsoft. No, keep at it...

Michael Arrington is pretty sure he understands why Microsoft is pursuing Yahoo:

Microsoft makes a ton of revenue on sales of software that sit on the computer. $15 billion a year for Windows alone, and another $16 billion for Office and Exchange Server in 2007. That’s 60% of Microsoft’s total revenue, and profits from those groups float the rest of the company. Microsoft isn’t a viable company without their consumer and business desktop software profits.

The real question isn’t “What can Microsoft do to fix their Windows product?” but rather “Even If Windows and Office were perfect, would it be enough to keep Microsoft relevant in the medium term?” I think the answer to that latter question might be “nope.” And that, of course, is why they want Yahoo so badly. Online advertising revenue is their only real hope of long term survival.

TechCrunch: Gartner Says Vista Will Collapse. And That's Why The Yahoo Deal Must Happen. (11 April 2008)

Techdirt: Microsoft's tough night

Just about 24 hours after [EU regulators] continued to insist that Microsoft is a monopoly that needs to be restricted, three major tech companies demonstrated why that might not be the case. First up, Google rolled out their long awaited presentations capabilities to Google Docs. Google continues to insist that this is merely a "feature" added to the Google Docs offering, but obviously, this is a light version of PowerPoint...

[...]

While the Google announcement may be more important long-term, it's also worth noting IBM's decision to offer a free downloadable office suite...

IBM is going to offer a commerically supported flavor of OpenOffice called "Lotus Symphony."

TechDirt: Microsoft's Tough Night: Google And IBM Both Launch Free Office Products

Like a squid spraying ink, and for the same reason

Frightened companies disperse FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) when threatened. Here's what Microsoft said yesterday, on the occasion of Google's announcement that major consulting and outsourcing firm Capgemini would start selling Google Apps to their customer base:

Microsoft also suggested a list of “top questions that enterprises should ask when considering the switch to [Google Apps Premier Edition]...

[...]

2. Google has a history of releasing incomplete products, calling them beta software, and issuing updates on a “known only to Google” schedule – this flies in the face of what enterprises want and need in their technology partners – what is Google doing that indicates they are in lock step with customer needs?

3. Google touts the low cost of their apps –not only price but the absence of need for hardware, storage or maintenance for Google Apps. BUT if GAPE is indeed a complement to MSFT Office, the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain. Doesn’t this result in increased complexity and increased costs?

And now you've had your irony supplement for the day. :-)

The marketplace already understands "Software as a Service," where the provider maintains all infrastructure and rents you the applications, even if Microsoft pretends not to.

These are early days yet, but this model is going to succeed in a big way.