How Microsoft did in 2004

Each year, usually the first week in January, I propose some New Year’s resolutions for our friends at Microsoft. While it is easier to suggest resolutions for others than it is to propose them for ourselves, I doubt that many corporations adopt resolutions at the New Year, especially the kind pledging them to good, or exemplary, behavior. Still, we should take a look at the resolutions I proposed last year and see how well Redmond complied with them.

There were three resolutions offered: stay the course on security; choose your friends wisely; and fight for standards. Here’s how they stand a year later.

1) Stay the course on security. The Trustworthy Computing Initiative came out in 2002, but still isn’t completely implemented. The long lead times between releases of software, the complexity of modern software, the need for backwards compatibility and the lingering climate of “user-friendliness” in Redmond have all contributed to a picture of a company only paying lip service to security. That’s not true, and the company needs to keep reminding folks about all of the security-conscious changes in its software. There’ll still be an occasional glitch, a stumble, but the direction is clear and the message needs to be reiterated often.

The company has been very active in getting fixes and patches out in a timely manner. New potential security flaws are still being discovered (especially in Internet Explorer) but, for the most part, they’re becoming more obscure and hard to exploit. The recent announcement that Microsoft will extend critical support for Windows NT (for a fee) is a good sign. Not a home run, but it is good solid backing for this resolution.

2) Choose your friends wisely. Microsoft executives have rightly noted that Linux is the biggest challenge they’ve ever faced for control of the Intel-based computer market. Yet, Microsoft has partnered with IBM (the world’s largest Linux distributor) to create Web services standards while at the same time giving millions of dollars to SCO (Linux’ worst nightmare). You need to co-opt the Linux loyalists, not eradicate them. Listen to IBM and stop doing deals with the devil, a.k.a. Darl McBride.

Microsoft continued, it seemed, to try to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about open source software in general, and Linux in particular, throughout the year culminating with CEO Steve Ballmer giving Asian IT execs what many saw as a veiled threat to sue users of open source for patent infringement (see https://www.nwfusion.com/columnists/2004/112904kearns.html).

Microsoft has chosen some wise friends, though, such as Vintela (see https://www.nwfusion.com/newsletters/nt/2004/0920nt2.html) whose business it is to connect Linux to Windows networks. Mixed results on this resolution, but probably more on the negative side of the balance.

3) Fight for standards. Microsoft found itself a surprising loser (to Eolas) in a patent suit about Web browser behavior. If the decision is allowed to stand, most of the Web will have to undergo massive changes – in some cases, to technologies not yet invented! The World-wide-Web Consortium (W3C) is ready to fight on appeal, but Microsoft has been reluctant to state its case. Time to stand up and be counted. It’s a chance to be considered one of the “good guys,” which you really need after the SCO payoffs mentioned in No. 2.

Microsoft still isn’t through with Eolas, but the picture is brighter (https://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0306eolaspaten.html) and Microsoft is still fighting. Also as the year ended, Microsoft made up (mostly) with Novell and Sun. The Sun deal (https://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/1129microands.html), in particular, shows great potential for strengthening standards in Web services, an area in need of good, widely used interoperable protocols and specifications.  This resolution is a solid win.

So it looks like a rating of 2.25 to 2.5 – that’s good work from the corporation everyone loves to hate, I think. Next time I’ll present a list of potential resolutions for 2005. Stay tuned.