Re: why

[Patrick Cox pdcox@xxxxxxxx]

And I've been "embraced" a couple of times.

-----Original Message-----
>From: Russ Urquhart 
>Sent: Dec 17, 2005 10:11 AM
>To: xywrite@xxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: why
>
>I agree.
>
>MS does not innovate they "embrace and extend".
>
>Russ
>On Dec 17, 2005, at 8:40 AM, Patrick Cox wrote:
>
>>
>> I was "squished" at both Borland and Netscape
>> and I am hardpressed to think of any real innovation
>> that Microsoft is responsible for. This isn't to say
>> there aren't things that MS does very well, but the
>> big ideas have invariably come from outside the
>> Redmond.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: George Scithers 
>>> Sent: Dec 17, 2005 5:58 AM
>>> To: xywrite@xxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: why
>>>
>>> Problem isn't that MicroSquish innovates -- it is that they do it
>>> so badly!
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "J R FOX" 
>>> To: 
>>> Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 1:59 PM
>>> Subject: Re: why
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> MS killed off all the competition in huge swaths of
>>>> the software biz. Once you are totally dominant and
>>>> complacent in your dominance, what incentive is there
>>>> to innovate ? And what incentive is there for anyone
>>>> else to attempt to compete with new products ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jordan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>