[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Microsoft ammunition
>From Infoworld:
March 24, 1997
Coda dependency may contribute to the fall of the
great Gates empire
Last week's column demonstrated that Microsoft is
unable to respond to the network computer in its
usual "co-opt the technology" manner -- a fact
that may signal the turning point in the company's
history. (Why am I leaving Intel out of this
prediction, you ask? Because it is in a far more
flexible position than Microsoft. Its chips can
run anything. Microsoft needs them to run
Windows.)
Add to this NC threat the mounting troubles for
Microsoft, and it's no wonder there's no joy in
Redmond tonight.
Look at the trends. According to International
Data Corp., Microsoft SQL Server for Windows NT
has been losing significant market share for two
years to competing products that run on multiple
platforms. Microsoft's Wolfpack clustering
technology is turning out to be a Chihuahuapack.
(See "Toothless Wolfpack," March 17.) Seemingly
endless rapid-fire announcements by ISVs to
support standards such as Java, JDBC, LDAP, IMAP4,
and CORBA are shoving Microsoft's TAPI, MAPI,
ISAPI, "SLAP-HAPI," and a host of other
Microsoft-centric specifications right out of the
limelight.
By now you have undoubtedly heard more than you
want to hear about the fellow in Germany who
demonstrated that a malicious ActiveX control can
secretly empty your bank account. Leaks, bugs, and
hastily cobbled service packs have been drawing
attention to the immaturity of Windows NT. And,
most recently, college kids have found more holes
in Internet Explorer than it takes to fill the
Albert Hall. (My apologies to those outside the
Beatles generation who don't get the reference.)
Meanwhile, Microsoft has crushed or alienated
practically every potential partner that might
otherwise have helped it out of its current fix.
Network hanky panky
This latest Microsoft Internet Explorer security
dustup really isn't a bug, it's a feature.
Internet Explorer was built to make it easy to
launch a file, whether that file is on your hard
drive or sitting on a server somewhere in
Freedonia. Unfortunately, it took someone outside
Microsoft to realize last August that the file one
launches from Explorer could be a Word for Windows
document packing a malevolent macro.
Then, in the past few weeks, .URL, .LNK, and .ISP
files were added to the danger list. Then it
surfaced that Microsoft's Common Internet File
System opens the door to network hanky panky. This
is clearly a company that isn't used to thinking
outside of the universe of the local LAN. The
Microsoft patches configure Explorer to ask your
permission before launching a potentially
dangerous file type (similar to Netscape
Navigator). OK, but this solution makes it
virtually impossible for Microsoft or anyone else
to integrate a browser seamlessly into the Windows
desktop.
If seamless, safe desktop access to remote files
on the Internet is the goal, Microsoft is spinning
its wheels. There is really only one way to
provide these features without introducing a local
security risk. You have to eliminate the
possibility that anything you run can affect your
local drives. Better still, get rid of your local
drives.
In short, a Java-based browser is a good way to do
it, but a Java-based network computer is best.
Which brings us back to the conclusion of last
week's column.
But, if you're tired of the repetition, here's a
reason you should sit through another sermon:
RandomNoise's Coda. Coda lets you design entire
Web pages in Java rather than use a mixture of
HTML content, tags, and Java applets.
Most pundits seem to be fixated on the fact that
Coda gives you a way to display fancy fonts that
HTML can't handle. Our own Bob Metcalfe is the
only one I know of who addressed the bigger
picture. (See From the Ether, March 10). He
pointed out that Coda may lead the way toward
replacing HTML with Java.
A Java-based Web page removes the distinction
between application and data. It presents data
just as an HTML page would, but every element on
the screen has the potential to be an interactive
part of a sophisticated application.
In other words, the Web page becomes both powerful
and safe enough to earn the right to be the new
desktop user interface to the world. But Internet
Explorer and Windows are nowhere in that equation.
So is Microsoft in a batting slump, or is this the
beginning of the end? Personally, I think
Microsoft can pull out of this one. All it would
have to do to fully recover is turn Windows NT
into Unix, drop Distributed Component Object Model
for CORBA, phase out its Windows-centric protocols
for platform-independent standards, adopt
NetWare's Novell Directory Services, kill ActiveX,
port SQL Server to several different platforms,
and abandon the idea of integrating Internet
Explorer into the desktop.
Well, I'm going to take a nap. Wake me when all
that happens.