In the Retarded Zealot Hall of Fame there is none loftier than Paul Thurrott. He has achieved a level of absolute inanity that is unparalleled by any MacMac, freetard or New Media Douchebag. Given that fact, today’s bit of mental vomit comes as little surprise.
There you have the headline of today’s diatribe; and there you have the crux of the idiocy. See, like any good zealot, in Paul’s mind Microsoft must be the end all and be all of, well, everything. The mere thought of cooperation is trauma inducing. Paul begins byspending a few sentences making snide comments about “conspiracy-happy Mac fanatics” (pot meet kettle) before making this comment:
With Apple gaining usage share in the PC market regularly over the past several years, why is Microsoft propping up this ever—-stronger competitor with the crucial Office productivity suite?
Oh, I don’t know Paul; maybe because Apple and Microsoft aren’t really competitors. I know that this is a shocking concept to both sides of the OS wars, but it’s true. Apple doesn’t compete with Microsoft. Fuck, every currently shipping Apple Macintosh computer not only can run Windows; they even come with a tool to facilitate that. In the personal computing space; Apple competes with Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. Which is, incidentally, why Apple will never willingly allow clones again.
And, to address Paul’s question, why does Microsoft “prop-up” Apple by producing the Office suite. The answer is simple, go to the (online) Apple Store and click the Productivity link under Software. What do we find on the first page? Why, it’s Microsoft Office for the Mac; at a tasty four hundred simoleans. That’s money in Steve Balmer’s sweaty hands; and Uncle Fester does like the money.
What Paul and the rest of the zealots, Mac and PC alike refuse to accept is that the OS wars are over, and nobody (or was it everybody) won. It’s 2009 and we now live in a glorious post-Glasnost utopia where we can run Office natively in OS X (and have pretty damn good compatibility with Win Office files), run Windows on a MacBook and sync our iPhones with Windows XP. Unfortunately Paul and crew are the OS wars versions of a Japanese soldier hiding in the jungles of Guam; vehemently denying that the war is over.
This week, Microsoft announced that it had licensed Exchange ActiveSync to yet another competitor, but this one is more powerful than most. Google, in turn, announced its Google Sync for Mobile Phone service, which allows popular mobile phones like the Apple iPhone, the Blackberry, the Nokia S60, Windows Mobile phones, and other devices wirelessly sync with Google-based contacts and calendars. As is so often the case with Google, Google Sync for Mobile Phone is absolutely free.
This is, I feel, unbelievably dangerous for Microsoft. The software giant already faces an exodus of customers, especially on the low end, to Google’s free and inexpensive cloud-based solutions, solutions that compete directly with expensive and complex Exchange-based servers and services.
I want to call out one part of the above before tackling the whole “…Google’s free and inexpensive cloud-based solutions, solutions that compete directly with expensive and complex Exchange-based servers and services.” No Paul, they really don’t compete. Again Paul makes the mistake of thinking that he knows what he’s talking about. The truth is, with the very small exception of a few Google Apps for Domains customers, Google apps aren’t competing with Exchange. Not many individuals are running Exchange 2008 Server on their home networks; and a similarly tiny number of corporations are using Google Apps.
The remainder of the piece is basically a repeat of the above argument. As far as I cantell (I may be wrong here, I’m not all that drunk yet) the logic goes like this: The iPhone is the most popular smart phone in the history of stuff. Exchange Server can’t compete with Google Apps. Therefore Microsoft should refuse to license Exchange Active Sync to force consumers to switch to buying Exchange licenses and WinMobile phones. Yeah, I definitely need more Gin, because that conclusion seems a bit off to me. I suppose that Paul hasn’t considered the possibility of Google just asking Apple to licence whatever they’re using for MobileMe syncing. It’s not like the CEO of Google sits on Apple’s Board of Directors or anyth…oh wait.
Of course, like a good little zealot, Paul misses the point by a continent. It’s a good thing for Microsoft to get Exchange Active Sync onto as many devices as it can; and used by as many back-end providers as it can. Because EAS isn’t competing with Google Apps or MobileMe. It’scompeting with BlackBerry Enterprise Server. And that’s who Google and Microsoft took a swipe at today.
But I guess that’s hard to see when you’re still hiding in the jungle.