In 1998 US Courts declared the Microsoft Corporation a monopoly by the US Courts. History again repeated itself in 2004 when the Microsoft Corporation was brought to court by the European Union. Since that time, Microsoft has been fighting what many sources claim to be a losing battle, while other giants run in Microsoft’s midst, as one monopoly dies, others are born (Albro). In the end, Microsoft will continue to dominate the industry, even if the amount of competition, which is considered healthy for advancement, continues to grow in size and number.
An example of Microsoft’s continued success in the industry took place in 2007, when the Microsoft Corporation reached a deal with the Chinese Government, causing them to thoroughly embrace Windows and Office, two products China once worked so hard to avoid (Hiner). In exchange for what was essentially a legal monopoly, Microsoft dropped the price of their Windows and Office from what is normally $100-$200 (In US, European, and other markets) down to $7-$10 for the Chinese market (Hiner). Of course, it has been noted that one of the reasons that software companies charge such high prices, is to recuperate profits lost due to piracy, after all, in 2006, the world software piracy rate was estimated to be at 35 percent (Washkush Jr.). The irony of the situation is that in following year (2008), China passed its first antitrust law, leading several Chinese corporations to announce intent to sue Microsoft as a monopoly for damages (Letzting). The arguments generally presented by the Chinese companies are simply the sheer size of Microsoft’s market share in China, however, it has been noted that Microsoft’s main competitor is actually itself in the form of illegal (usually pirated) copies of their own products, and that Microsoft only makes a modest profit in the Chinese markets (Washkush Jr.).
This brings the next question to light. Is Microsoft still a monopoly? Four years ago, Edward N. Albro of PCWorld asked that question. Noting that ever since Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson of the U.S. District Court of Washington, D.C. officially declared Microsoft a monopoly some eleven years ago (eight years at the time of the article), the company has been losing ground to competitors “such as Google and Apple,” as well as their continued battle over antitrust cases in Europe. Ignoring the legal definition of a monopoly, Albro is only interested in Microsoft’s ability to “make the rest of the technology market cower;” the question being, do they still have it? The author noted that even though “Dell now sells PCs loaded with Linux, as do HP, Lenovo, and other PC vendors,” it has little impact due to marginal sales. He also ignores Apple’s continued growth in sales, as “that doesn't mean much to HP, Dell, or other PC vendors. Their livelihood is still tied to selling Windows boxes.” What is import about all of this is the simple fact that these vendors are selling PCs loaded with Linux. Even more so, the fact that “when [Albro] recently bought a Dell desktop for home use, it came preloaded with products from two of Microsoft's most formidable competitors--Google's desktop search service and Mozilla's Firefox” speaks volumes. It appears, as the author argues, that Microsoft is not “using its power to muscle competitors off the desktop.” Among other arguments, Albro argues that Microsoft’s lack of a killer internet strategy, and the continued growth of online applications that perform functions in the same manor as Microsoft Office, will lead to the decline and end of Microsoft’s status as a monopoly. Albro ignores some of the implications of using the internet for every function of your computer, such as the major dangers to privacy and security, but argues a strong point: Microsoft is not acting as aggressive as it used to, and if it doesn’t gear up with innovation, it’s unlikely to survive (Albro).
David Goldman, a staff writer at CNNMoney reported March 31, 2011 that Microsoft is suing Google as a monopoly and has won a surprising ally, Samuel Miller, the prosecutor who led the federal government's first antitrust case against Microsoft more than a decade ago (Goldman). Miller stated "Having prosecuted the Microsoft case, its seems to me that Google, as a monopoly, is engaging in the same tactics to keep its dominant position as Microsoft was engaging in," Miller says. "Those are the same tactics that got Microsoft in trouble." In what Goldman refers to as “an ironic twist of fate,” Microsoft now “claims that rival Google is unfairly using its position as a monopoly in the search market to impede the software giant's ability to compete.” Microsoft filed a formal complaint with the European Commission on Thursday, March 31, citing Google’s abuse of YouTube, which uses their ownership of the website to disadvantage their competitors’ search results, as well as hoarding AdWords data as well as various exclusivity agreements that Google holds with websites in Europe, giving them a 90% market share (Goldman).
What this all adds up to is actually quite simple. Microsoft continues to dominate the industry, even if it has been shown to be in decline on various fronts such as the operating system and web browser markets, it still commands a huge market share in both those and other markets. Microsoft’s position in the search engine market continues to grow, and Microsoft makes their stake in the internet itself very clear with their May 10, 2011 announcement that they will purchase Skype for $8.5 billion (Halliday). Microsoft is no longer a monopoly, and it isn’t on the verge of collapse. It’s recovering.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Microsoft's Web Browser Market Share Sits At 55.92%; Losing Ground to Mozilla and Google
Microsoft has steadily steadily been losing browser market share to Google and Mozilla since the debuts of Mozilla Firefox (November 9, 2004) and Google Chrome (September 2, 2008), peaking at about 95% in 2002 and 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer), Microsoft's dominance lead to stagnation, with the resurgence of rival browsers, however, major updates have been released.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers
OS Market Share, March 2011
The bar graph clearly shows Microsoft's domination over the operating systems industry, over all, Microsoft controls 81.70% of the OS market. Their closest competitor, Apple, Inc. (with the Mac OS X) only has a 7.12% market share. It has been noted however that Apple's business strategy often relies on being at the higher end of the industry, relying on their status as a upper line product, ie, being expensive, to make a profit. (Cj http://cjacob.com/2011/02/microsoft-mobile-to-surpass-apple-in-2015/)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems
Another two sources show a differing graph, which claims to be from March 2011 as well, but excludes Windows 7 from mention.
http://gamespics.com/computers/1038-operating-system-3.html
http://www.macblogz.com/2008/09/04/new-york-times-microsoft-windows-monopoly-is-slowly-eroding/
Microsoft Labels Google A European Monopoly
David Goldman, a staff writer at CNNMoney reported March 31, 2011 that Microsoft is suing Google as a monopoly and has won a surprising ally, Samuel Miller, the prosecutor who led the federal government's first antitrust case against Microsoft more than a decade ago (Goldman). Miller stated "Having prosecuted the Microsoft case, its seems to me that Google, as a monopoly, is engaging in the same tactics to keep its dominant position as Microsoft was engaging in," Miller says. "Those are the same tactics that got Microsoft in trouble." In what Goldman refers to as “an ironic twist of fate,” Microsoft now "claims that rival Google is unfairly using its position as a monopoly in the search market to impede the software giant's ability to compete.” Microsoft filed a formal complaint with the European Commission on Thursday, March 31 (Goldman), citing Google’s abuse of YouTube, which uses their ownership of the website to disadvantage their competitors’ search results, as well as hoarding AdWords data as well as various exclusivity agreements that Google holds with websites in Europe, giving them a 90% market share (Goldman).
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/31/technology/microsoft_google_antitrust_case/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/31/technology/microsoft_google_antitrust_case/index.htm
Friday, May 20, 2011
Is Microsoft Still Playing for Keeps?
Is Microsoft still a monopoly? Four years ago, Edward N. Albro of PCWorld asked that question. Noting that ever since Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson of the U.S. District Court of Washington, D.C. officially declared Microsoft a monopoly some eleven years ago (eight years at the time of the article), the company has been losing ground to competitors “such as Google and Apple,” as well as their continued battle over antitrust cases in Europe. Ignoring the legal definition of a monopoly, Albro is only interested in Microsoft’s ability to “make the rest of the technology market cower;” the question being, do they still have it? The author noted that even though “Dell now sells PCs loaded with Linux, as do HP, Lenovo, and other PC vendors,” it has little impact due to marginal sales. He also ignores Apple’s continued growth in sales, as “that doesn't mean much to HP, Dell, or other PC vendors. Their livelihood is still tied to selling Windows boxes.” What is import about all of this is the simple fact that these vendors are selling PCs loaded with Linux. Even more so, the fact that “when [Albro] recently bought a Dell desktop for home use, it came preloaded with products from two of Microsoft's most formidable competitors--Google's desktop search service and Mozilla's Firefox” speaks volumes. It appears, as the author argues, that Microsoft is not “using its power to muscle competitors off the desktop.” Among other arguments, Albro argues that Microsoft’s lack of a killer internet strategy, and the continued growth of online applications that perform functions in the same manor as Microsoft Office, will lead to the decline and end of Microsoft’s status as a monopoly. Albro ignores some of the implications of using the internet for every function of your computer, such as the major dangers to privacy and security, but argues a strong point: Microsoft is not acting as aggressive as it used to, and if it doesn’t gear up with innovation, it’s unlikely to survive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)