CHS 85 - you really have no clue do you. Being technically superior has little
to do with it. The industry is littered with the remains of technically
superior products. If Microsoft came in and said for $85 a seat, we can
replace WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, and Harvard Graphics which you are currently
paying $150 a seat... purchasing and business lines drove the decision based on
economics. Word was good enough. WordPerfect was far to slow to
embrace WSIWG technology. In fact they were horrible at it. Even in their DOS
version they had issues with fonts and kerning. For law offices that lived in
fixed spaced fonts, no big deal. But use a proportionally spaced fonts, all
bets were off. They took way too long to fix these issues and it opened the
door to value based pricing from Microsoft.As to the comment above
about dBase, Ashton-Tate didn't loose to Microsoft. Access didn't come into the
forefront until well after. Ashton-Tate lost its way because dBase 4.0 was a
buggy product rushed out the door. Borland with Paradox kicked its butt. I
know, I was a product manager at Ashton-Tate.
Interesting that Microsoft called Peterson to the stand as their witness but he
seemingly said that WP followed the rules set forward by Microsoft and that
Microsoft cut corners to win the race. Pretty clear-cut against Microsoft, in
my mind. It's looking more and more like Novell will win this thing. It seems
that there is pretty stong evidence that MS cut the right corners.
Still hard to believe that Novell blew $1.4B on a sinking ship.Novell might have lived a little longer had it not done that deal.
I'm not sure what Novell expected back then. They were at the mercy of a company
that was producing an operating system that was rapidly gaining in popularity,
that most software creators were trying to get on board with, including other
companies that wrote word processing software. All while Microsoft was creating
one of their own. If it was true misdirection, then yes, Microsoft should be
held accountable. But from what it sounds like, Microsoft suffered from
disjointed internal communications, like any other large company then or now. If
there were talking about of both sides of their mouth to external partners, it's
probably because there was a lot of that going on inside too. A lot of people
inside Microsoft probably did believe that OS/2 was the future, but had those
beliefs dashed when Windows became the cash-cow. Lots of business leaders pit
their own people against each other to drive innovation. Enzo Ferrari was
notorious for doing that...
I still like Word Perfect better than Microsoft Word.
Oh boo hoo. If WordPerfect is the superior product, why isn't it on every
computer? It sounds like WordPerfect backed the wrong product, got
out-marketed, out-developed, out-foxed by another company and wishes to make
their lawyers rich. Not every company who thinks they make a great product is
going to be successful. My VHS tapes won't play in my DVD player.
I think I'll sue Samsung, the maker of my DVD player for not including special
consideration just for my tapes.
I worked with both Word and Word Perfect in the legal market for years. I can
tell you that Word Perfect was, and still is, the superior word processing
product period! Microsoft used its operating system platform and superior
marketing to capture (some say corner) the market. Word lacks certain critical
legal functions and presents serious security issues when used in a security
@Wanda - WordPerfect may have been hard for you, but no harder for
me that other software of that era, in fact Word Perfect was easier than
most.WordPerfect was not the only company to have problems with
Microsoft practices, most of which are gone now. You can take once popular
programs like d-base(c) etc. whose demise was due to well designed actions of
Microsoft. For instance sometimes the documentation that came with
other programs equaled what Microsoft was selling their product for (at or near
a loss) so others could not compete with them regardless how good they might
have been.Microsoft didn't get rich by not being aggressive.By the way, if you are a great fan of Word(c) you may be interested in
Open Office(c) which is free and reads and writes in appropriate formats. I
happen to even think it is better!
I sold microsoft back in 1993-96 and many customers in NYC preferred WP, but we
priced them out of the deal.....we didn't hold a gun to the customers
head.......it was economics!
I sat in a conference room at the old excelsier hotel in provo in the early 90s
and listened to Alan Ashton extol the many virtues of OS2.... demonstrated a
beta working version of wordperfect for OS2. he made it very clear that OS2 was
Get real. Word Perfect was not user friendly - personally I always thought it
was created by the devil, but kidding aside, the other problem is that it made
it difficult to communicate electronically and attach a document in Microsoft
Word to another person only using Word Perfect - or vice versa. Life has been
much easier with most people using Microsoft Word. Get over it!