|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 04:22 PM EDT |
http://groklawstatic.ibiblio.org/pdf/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/6000/PX06351.pdf
<p>
<b>From:</b> Brad Thayer<br />
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 24. 1999 10:53 AM<br />
<b>To:</b> Mike Moskowitz<br />
<b>Subject:</b> FW: bad news from microsoft
</p>
<p>
Mike-
</p>
<p>
Here's the response from Microsoft Tech support regarding the ASF issue. From
what it
looks like below, it may be impossible to do ASF with our burst filter (in the
WMP)
because Microsoft has integrated it in such a way that you cannot insert a new
source
filter (i.e. burst async source filter) without rewriting some
ASF-spec-dependent stuff.
And of course, it appears that MS will prevent us from licensing the spec.
</p>
<p>
Just got the message, so don't know what the outcome will be in engineering....
</p>
<p>
Brad<br />
-----Original Message-----<br />
From: Ed Lyons<br />
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 10:46 AM<br />
To: Robert Scott; Linh Dang; Brad Thayer; 'YuanMeng@aol.com'<br />
Subject: bad news from microsoft
</p>
<p>
-----Original Message-----<br />
From: Sameer Murudkar [mailto:sameerm@microsoft.com]<br />
Sent: Monday, August 23, 1999 7:10 PM<br />
To: 'edlyons@burst.com'<br />
Subject: Email for case SRZ990819000584
</p>
<p>
Hi,
</p>
<p>
This e-mail is regarding case SRZ990819000584. I apologize for the late
reply. We were a little backed up.
</p>
<p>
Regarding the issue, the DirectShow source filter for handling ASF data is
Windows Media Source filter. The Windows Media Source filter also acts as a
splitter to split the ASF file into its constituent streams. The Windows
Media Source is implemented by dxmasf.dll. It can accept ASF data from
various sources like a locally stored ASP file or from a NetShow server
using various protocols like mms, http, msbd etc. The Windows Media Source
filter also combines a splitter which splits the ASF file into its
components streams like audio and video streams. The audio, video streams
are then input to their respective ACM/ICM handlers in a filter graph. Audio
and video are typical, but there can be other streams like Script commands,
JPEG stream etc. Basically, the functionality of the source and splitter
filter is combined in the Windows Media source filter.
</p>
<p>
To use Async as the source filter for ASF data you need to splitter filter
to split the ASF data into its components streams. To do this however, you
need to know the specification of ASP streams. Unfortunately. Microsoft has
stopped licensing the ASF 1.0 specification. Also, we do not have a
stand-alone ASF splitter filter which you can use with your application.
</p>
<p>
I guess you will have to stick with using the Windows Media Source filter
for handling ASF data.
</p>
<p>
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
</p>
<p>
Thanks,<br />
Sameer Murudkar<br />
Product Support services http://www.microsoft.com/support<br />
(425) 704 3073<br />
We want to provide the best service possible. For comments about the
quality of technical support please eontact my manager, Mitch Nadler at
[<mailto:managers@microsoft.com>]
</p>
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 04:37 PM EDT |
http://groklawstatic.ibiblio.org/pdf/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/6000/PX06133.pdf
<p>
Author: Robert Olstad at SERVER1<br />
Date: 8/21/97 12:51 PM<br />
Priority: Normal<br />
TO: Laura F. Lee at Orchid<br />
Subject: RE: Back to Work/Back to School Promotion<br />
------------------------------------ Message Contents
------------------------------------<br />
We may need something more formal from you like a letter indicating your
intent or possibly even an official LOI. Their concern is they don't
want to begin their communications to the channel and development of the
POS promo materials and include Acer if they aren't 100% sure you will
be shipping these products (meaning we have a signed license). So i'm
waitinq to hear from Craig what he needs from us. Actually it's not so
much Craig as our retail channel group who is putting up a majority of
the funds ($1M+) and taking responsibility for the retail
comrmmication/promotion. We may need to step up our negotiation of the
license agreement in order to meet a deadline to get you guys included.
I will notify you as soon as I hear something.
</p>
<div style="border-left: solid 1px black; padding-left: 0.5em">
<p>
-----Original Message-----<br />
From: Robert Olstad [SMTP:rolstad@smtplink.acer.com]<br />
Sent: Monday, April 21, 1991 7:35 AM<br />
To: Bob Chapman<br />
Subject: Re: Back to Work/Back to School Promotion
</p>
<p>
Yes, we are looking into this exact bundle. I just recently sent you
a
e-mail regarding some business issues that I hope we can work through
regarding the Aspire 5 bundle. I hope we can begin the discussions
while you are in Taiwan. We currently have all of these titles in our
test lab and I am expecting all to pass our quality/compatability
tests.
</p>
<p>
Best Regards,
</p>
<p>
Robert Olstad
</p>
<p>
Hi! We are working on our next OEM/Retail Channel promotion and I
would
like to see Acer America included. Since we haven't completed our new
license agreem t yet, if you would like to participate, I need your
commitment that it is your intent to license/ship Encarta, Works,
Money,
and Trip Planner on all Aspire systems shipping to the channel from
8/1
- 9/30. The timing seems to make sense for Aspire5 and the bundle
we've
been discussing.
</p>
<p>
This promo will be very similar to the MSCASH promo earlier this year.
</p>
<p>
Some details (draft) of the promo are below, although everything is
subject to change at this point.
</p>
<p>
FYI, I will be out of the office the rest of the week visiting Acer in
Taiwan.
</p>
<p>
Best regards,<br />
Bob
</p>
<p>
----------------------------------------<br />
Promotional Offer<br />
1. Buy any qualified PC and any single Microsoft product, and get
up to 12 off of any Microsoft product purchased, up to $50! (via
mail-in
rebate).<br />
2. Limited to time of PC purchase. PC and Microsoft add-on must be
on sales receipts dated within 7 days of each other.
</p>
<p>
Timing<br />
August 1 - September 15th or September 30th (Complementing the
start
of the Windows 95 "Get Current Campaign")
</p>
<p>
Objective<br />
* Increase the attach rate of key Microsoft products to the new PC
buyer.<br />
* Provide a high visibility value-add offering to OEM's who
license strategic Microsoft products.<br />
* Differentiate key OEM brands to the channel and customers.<br />
* Influence the channel to merchandise and recommend systems with
Microsoft solutions.<br />
* Engage retail accounts to cross merchandise PC's with Microsoft
products and retail software.<br />
*
</p>
</div>[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 24 2013 @ 05:26 PM EDT |
http://groklawstatic.ibiblio.org/pdf/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03222.pdf
<p>
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 3222.<br />
Comes v. Microsoft
</p>
<p>
The Living Document<br />
OpenDoc White Paper
</p>
<p>
Introduction
</p>
<p>
This paper intends to lay the strategic groundwork concerning the
future of OpenDoc in conjunction with WordPerfect. There is a
revolution on the horizon that will change the very manner of our
work and refocus our energies toward content and away from the
monolithic applications of today. Technologies such as OpenDoc
and OLE 2.0 promise changes that are both creative and
collaborative in nature, forcing strategic decisions upon
software vendors that can be both culturally and financially
dramatic.
</p>
<p>
This paper will include the following:
</p>
<p>
Convergence towards the document<br />
History and definition of the document<br />
OpenDoc...What is it?<br />
OLE 2.0 vs OpenDoc<br />
Strategic implications for WordPerfect
</p>
<p>
Convergence Toward the Document
</p>
<p>
Every major software application (spreadsheet, presentation
graphics, word processor) has a real life metaphor that gives the
user perspective and definition of what the application can do.
For example, the real life metaphor for document creation
originally included pen, paper and eraser. Over time,
typewriters evolved to automate some of the ordinary tasks that
were involved in creating the document. Software vendors analyzed
the typewriter metaphor and the processes behind the metaphor and
invented the word processor. These vendors (WordPerfect,
Wordstar, Microsoft, Lotus...) have provided the world with an
accurate representation of an existing metaphor and its
processes. Since the inception of the word processor, vendors
have set out to refine functional changes based upon the above
identified processes and metaphor.
</p>
<p>
There are two problems that become inherent with this process.
First, these software vendors have not re-examined the actual
metaphor since its inception.
</p>
<p>
The assumption is that although functional changes have taken
place over time, metaphorical changes have not (false
assumption).
</p>
<p>
Is it correct to assume that during the past 13 years, people
have not changed the way they work? Of course not; automation,
organizational structures and behavior, and the evolution of the
workgroup have all changed how people perform their daily tasks,
changing the very processes upon which the current metaphors are
based. Since the processes have changed, metaphorical changes
have certainly occurred. In short, the typewriter metaphor no
longer holds true in the description of tomorrow's word
processor.
</p>
<p>
Secondly, the document itself has changed over the past decade.
Throughout history, the document was used to communicate static
information that had already been gathered and put to rest. The
document usually consisted of one input, one output and one
author.
</p>
<p>
Input is defined as the number of information sources represented
in the document.
Output is defined as the number of ways the document could be
read.
Author is defined as one who originates, creates or changes the
document.
</p>
<p>
The second issue hinges upon the history of the document itself
and its evolution into a compound document. In pre-historic
times, man wrote on stone to portray history or for story telling
purposes. This device was the best available for storage yet
retrieval was unrealistically limited. The medium (stone) was
very limiting in scope and could only be used once and typically
by one individual. The model of com unication during this time
was fairly limited to one input and one output which proved very
difficult to share.
</p>
<p>
Handwritten manuscripts (on paper or a form of paper) followed,
but only offered a minor increase in distribution capabilities.
Input was very limited and was largely viewed as static in time.
Output was restricted by the time and energies of the scribe(s).
As with stone, storage and archival was limited to the physical
document itself, severely restricting the flow of information.
</p>
<p>
The printing press proved to be an invention that changed all the
facets of the document and communication as a whole. The
printing press allowed for distribution capacities (output) that
were previously unattainable, thus improving the speed with which
information was disseminated. The printing press made it
plausible for multiple authors to be published in one paper,
document or periodical, thus increasing the input in size but not
scope. The printing press however, removed the writing process
from the document, which tends to make it static in nature upon
printing.
</p>
<p>
The typewriter enabled the end-user to personally create a
finished document. The authoring process is no longer removed
from the document. It is true that, with the typewriter, the
document could conceivably have multiple inputs but the inputs
are static in nature, meaning the information being displayed
isn't dynamic, it’s inflexible to change. The typewriter (like
handwritten manuscript) limited output to the time and energies
of the typist. However, combined with the modern copier, the
typewriter became a powerful device for static document creation
and multiple copy distribution.
</p>
<p>
It is the typewriter that the modern-day word processor mimics
most accurately. The documents created in a word processor
improved slightly in two areas: input and output. Using the
word processor, today’s users can pull information from other
documents, spreadsheets, databases or presentations using the
clipboard function on both Windows and Macintosh based machines.
Thus, input becomes slightly more dynamic and easier to implement
than what was achievable at the time of the handwritten
manuscript. Also, by nature of the medium, the word processor
made such input less static. Content could be repeatedly changed
to better reflect the dynamic characteristics of information.
Improvements to output were gained when the word processor was
combined with the network printer and e-mail. The printer
allowed for printed reproduction of the document e-mail allowed
for mass, instantaneous distribution. However, as with
typewriters, multi-author collaboration is laborious and
simultaneous collaboration is non-existent.
</p>
<p>
Today's Document
</p>
<p>
Today's document, as defined by the above events, is the victim
of evolution. Over time, the document has grown to represent the
following:
</p>
<p>
Static information<br />
Limited authorship<br />
Widespread output capabilities
</p>
<em>[Ed: Partially legible handwritten note: "eg vis[..]
Budgets?"]</em>
<p>
Information has played a static role in each of the events
described above. The underlying assumption is that the author
knows exactly what they want to present and that the information
isn't going to change. While this may work for periodic
publications, it has little merit in today’s business world.
Business plans, financial results, productivity reports,
marketing strategies, advertising plans...all are exam les of
doigments that not only change periodically but can change almost
daily.
</p>
<p>
Is it inconceivable that a document can be continually monitored
and updated with the most current information available?
</p>
<p>
A company that bases its future on static information will become
history. Information leads to knowledge and knowledge breeds
wisdom. Wisdom is used to make profitable business decisions
based upon educated risks.
</p>
<p>
Today's document is commonly written by one individual. This is
not because it is undesirable for others to participate in the
creation process, it is simply because of the technical
difficulty of collaborative writing. The document is a natural
metaphor for the collection of ideas and information that may
come from a group of individuals or places (infobases, databases
etc). However, today’s word processors assume there is only one
author/owner and are designed to take advantage of and propagate
that very paradigm.
</p>
<p>
Name an organization where one person controls all the
information? Is it inconceivable that more than one person can
add value to the creation of a document?
</p>
<p>
Lastly, output of the document has matured the most over time.
It is now possible to distribute multiple copies of the document
electronically via e-mail as well as with the new improved
electronic publishing tools. Printing, despite the improvements
in speed and quality, hasn't really changed since the printing
press innovations. In short, throughout time, the major
improvements in the "document" have focused on
output...distribution of the finished product.
</p>
<p>
Is it not time to bring similar breakthroughs to the creative
aspects (input and authorship) of the document?
</p>
<p>
The Living Document
</p>
<p>
The living document is a document that makes exponential
improvements on the traditional document in two areas; input and
authorship. Input as defined above includes information parts
such as text, graphics, spreadsheets, database data, video, sound
and any other conceivable form of media. Input in the past has
proven to be very static or stagnant in its content. The living
document allows for dynamic input that changes or evolves as the
information becomes available. The living document is a
breathing document that is never put to rest±it is a version
oriented document linked with supplemental information. However,
the nature of some types of documents requires a stable, never
changing document which is also possible.
</p>
<p>
Consequently, the living document is no longer confined to one
application for creation. In fact, a word processor,
spreadsheet, database, or presentations package could all be in
charge of document creation. The applications will begin to
represent document shells that are responsible for the
containership of content found in the object parts. Technologies
that allow for this include OLE 2.0 and to a greater extent
OpenDoc. Intuitively hyperlinking ideas and concepts with
alternative informational sources provides for a infinitely
expanding knowledge base which resides in a "dataspace".
</p>
<p>
How to use it
</p>
<p>
The changes that are outlined are truly revolutionary and are
cause for concern for ISVs and end-users alike. However, the
implementation of such changes will not disrupt how documents are
currently created or distributed. Initially, OpenDoc will be
used to encapsulate different data structures in the document,
provides background data which is pertinent to the decision at
hand. Information management allows the decision maker to more
accurately wade through the dataspace/infobase.
</p>
<p>
Is it unimaginable to drink from a fire hose?
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc...What is it?
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc is a set of technologies being co-developed by Apple,
WordPerfect, Borland, IBM, Novell. The goal of OpenDoc is to
make the user's computing experience as easy and productive as
possible. People are using computers for more complex tasks that
include multiple applications and working together on projects.
This realization identifies a shift to shared, collaborative
computing resources.
</p>
<p>
The OpenDoc architecture reduces the complexity of computing
while simultaneously supporting the flexible and highly
customizable applications of the future. OpenDoc is an
architecture, designed to integrate software and enable sharing
across multiple computer platforms-providing users with a new
level of computing power, flexibility and ease of use. The
architecture is an object-based framework for developing
applications that are fully integrated and interoperable across
platforms and distributed networks, giving the user the ability
to capitalize on the true power of the document as a means of
communicating.
</p>
<p>
Benefits to the End-user and to the Developer
</p>
<p>
The OpenDoc architecture benefits the end-user and developer in
different ways. The benefits for the end-user are as follows:
</p>
<p>
Easy creation of compound documents. OpenDoc is designed to
handle current and future types of media. Users can place any
kind of media into an OpenDoc document using the familiar
cut-and-paste or drag and drop manipulation, thus creating a
compound document with "rich" content.
</p>
<p>
Editing "in place." With OpenDoc, users can edit any type of
content within a single document, without having launch the
native application. This allows the user to focus on the
document and not banal formatting. In addition, this technique
saves system resources from unnecessary allocation.
</p>
<p>
Powerful document management. Rather than manually assembling
the various pieces of a document, users can let an OpenDoc
document hold all of them. This reduces the task of managing
files, and facilitates document exchange and updating. As
documents are edited, changes are tracked through drafts,
ensuring greater data integrity and allowing users to work on
shared documents without content loss from version to version.
</p>
<p>
Cross-platform support. Because OpenDoc is designed to offer
full interoperability between platforms, OpenDoc users will be
able to share and interact with complex documents, regardless of
differences in software or hardware, or which platform the
document resides on.
</p>
<p>
Consistency of operation. Because users can specify preferred
part editors, they need learn only one way to edit each type of
data-for example, using the dame text editor for word processing,
entering spreadsheet data, or labeling diagrams.
</p>
<p>
Uniformity of interface. OpenDoc defines a consistent user
interface for embedding and manipulating all kinds of media in
documents.
</p>
<p>
Scalability. The OpenDoc human interface addresses a wide range
of users, from novices to experts. No class of user has to
understand the additional functionality typically used at the
next level-novices can create compound documents easily, while
experts can experience nearly unlimited potential.
</p>
<p>
"Plug-and-play" solutions. With OpenDoc, vendors will be able to
assemble collections of parts into solution sets that target
specific tasks or work styles. These parts can be shared across
documents, news briefs and even networks.
</p>
<p>
Benefits to the developer include:
</p>
<p>
Faster more efficient development. Software developers can reuse
already developed parts, eliminating the need to start from
scratch with each development effort. This ability to reuse
existing parts also means that developers need spend less time on
parts that are peripheral to their main area of expertise.
</p>
<p>
Diminished costs of software development. The fact that parts
are smaller than applications makes them both quicker and cheaper
to write, which reduces the penalties for failure.
</p>
<p>
Industry-standard object management. Because parts can use a
CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture)-compliant
object mechanism, they can be written in a wide range of
programming languages and development will be supported by many
tool vendors. This mechanism gives developers high performance
coupled with great flexibility in the use of "plug-and-play"
objects.
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc Technology
</p>
<p>
The OpenDoc architecture enables the creation of compound,
collaborative documents which are interoperable across platforms,
other documents and other compound document architectures
including OLE 2.0. The architecture is open and source code will
be available to vendors who want to support the technology in
their products.
</p>
<p>
The major concepts explored in the architecture include the
following:
</p>
<p>
Documents<br />
Parts
</p>
<p>
Documents
</p>
<p>
The document has been described and defined in detail above. In
short, OpenDoc propagates fundamental changes in the document.
With an OpenDoc implementation, a document is no longer a single
application but is instead composed of smaller blocks of content.
This content can be interactively edited, altered, updated and
contained in as content parts.
</p>
<p>
The document will act as a shell that houses many parts of
content. This shell can take the form of many of today's
applications including a word processor, database, spreadsheet or
graphics application. In short, nearly all applications will
have the ability to create a document.
</p>
<p>
The definitive applications of today will blend together to form
a document in the future.
</p>
<p>
Parts
</p>
<p>
Parts can be considered the building blocks in OpenDoc and in the
ensuing document structure. These "parts" will replace the
monolithic applications of today with smaller units of content
dynamically bound with related functionality. OpenDoc parts may
be viewed in four ways: content containers, part editors, frames
and part handlers.
</p>
<p>
Content containers can be described as data blocs, each
containing information from a myriad of applications including
graphics, spreadsheets, databases and text from word processors.
Examples of data include pictures, spreadsheet cells, database
queries, digitized sound and video etc. The particular type of
data that each part contains is known as the part’s intrinsic
content and is defined by the developer/end-user.
</p>
<p>
The "mother" of all parts is known as the root part. Every
single document has a root part in which all other parts are
embedded. The relationship between these parts describe the
structure and function of the document. A part's contents
include all the data that part needs to implement its specific
functionality as well as the information needed to visually
display the part object. Additionally, the parts developer
determines whether to support the capacity to contain other
parts, however, a key characteristic of OpenDoc is that if a part
can contain one type of part, it can contain all types of parts.
</p>
<p>
Part Editors
</p>
<p>
Part editors are the independent programs that manipulate and
display a particular kind of content. OpenDoc part editors serve
as the building blocks for solution building as well as document
creation. Conceivably these editors would consist of text,
graphic, mathematical, database editors as well as others. These
part editors will allow for plug and play document creation. In
addition, OpenDoc will allow these part editors to be dispersed
across a network allowing disparate authors the ability to
contribute to the creation of a document (providing the proper
rights have been given). OpenDoc parts will allow developers to
create new applications in a manner similar to that of
constructing a document template in today’s world.
</p>
<p>
Frames
</p>
<p>
Parts can also be viewed as the boundaries at which one kind of
content in a document ends and another begins. A key element of
the concept of parts is that each part of a document has its own
content model±the model of objects and operations that is
presented to the user. The content model changes at the frame
between parts. For example, a compound document could have its
root part as a WordPerfect text part editor that provides the
template for the document. Included in the document is a pie
chart that has been generated from a charting editor. This pie
chart is linked back to a spreadsheet editor that contains the
raw data and can be updated on demand. The following figure
shows this format in a document.
</p>
<p>
Part Handlers
</p>
<p>
When a part is being displayed or edited, a part handler is
invoked to perform those tasks.<br />
A part handler is responsible for the following things:
</p>
<p>
Displaying the part both on the screen and for printing
purposes.<br />
Editing the part. The part handler must accept events and
change the state of the part so that the user can edit and script
the part.<br />
Storage management (both persistent and runtime) for the part.
The part handler must be able to read the part from a storage
device into main memory, manage the runtime storage associated
with the part, and write the part back out to the storage device.
</p>
<p>
Part handlers are dynamically linked into the runtime world of
the document, based on the part types that appear in the
document. Because any sort`o£ part may appear in a document, the
part handler must have the ability to respond to each part, hence
the dynamic link to the document. This will provide for a smooth
and consistent user experience.
</p>
<p>
In addition, pert handlers can be divided into two types:
editors and viewers. When a part is activated an available part
editor becomes activated as well, giving the user access to the
tools needed to change or modify the content. Conversely, a
viewer provides the user with the ability to display and print
the part but does not allow for editing. Viewers primary uses
include when the recipient of a document does not have access to
a license of a part used in the document or when the person
sending the document does not want the recipient to alter it.
</p>
<p>
Both editors and viewers can interpret the contents of the part
and display that content for the user. The idea is that
eventually, developers will create both kinds of handler for
every part. The editor would be sold, but the viewer would be
freely distributed to enable and encourage document interchange.
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc Versus OLE 2.0
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc is the result of collaborative efforts from Apple,
Novell, WordPerfect, IBM, Borland and other ISVs and industry
consortiums. The advantages that OpenDoc has over OLE 2.0 are
substantial and include the following:
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc is an "Open" architecture<br />
The architecture is network ready and intelligent<br />
OpenDoc handles odd shaped parts<br />
OpenDoc allows for multiple moving parts per page
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc is truly an open architecture. OpenDoc is a cross
platform architecture that abides to industry standards and
consortiums. Component Integrated Laboratory (CIL is the
industry consortium representing the global interests of OpenDoc)
is committed to develop OpenDoc for the Macintosh, Windows, OS/2
and UNIX platforms with interoperability being promised for the
Taligent platform. Conversely, Microsoft has committed to
delivering OLE 2.0 on the Windows platform and is giving lip
service to the Macintosh platform. Secondly, the source code for
this architecture will be made available to ISVs for
implementation purposes. Also, OpenDoc is compliant with the
Object Management Group's (OMG) Common Object Request Broker
Architecture (CORBA) while OLE 2.0 and Microsoft's Cairo (the
company’s future object oriented operating system) are not. CIL
is also working closely with the Open Software Foundation (OSF),
and X Consortium to assure standards compliancy. Lastly, OpenDoc
will be interoperatable with OLE 2.0.
</p>
<p>
The architecture is network ready, allowing for parts to be
shipped, transferred and requested from disparate networks and
servers. OLE 2.0 doesn't allow for such network intricacies,
hence OLE 2.0 links will be severed upon shipping across
disparate networks or servers. In short, OLE 2.0 works well in a
single server, single network environment but has no capacity to
perform in a multi-server, multi-networked environment. Through
IBM’s system Object Model and the CORBA industry standard,
OpenDoc will provide access to distributed object services.
</p>
<p>
In the OLE 2.0 model, parts can only take the shape of a
rectangle or square. In the real world, parts should be able to
assume the best possible shape to adequately display the
information on hand. OpenDoc allows for odd shaped parts to be
portrayed and handled within a document. Also, in the OLE 2.0
model, documents are forced to comply with one moving part per
page. This means that in any one page of a document, OLE 2.0 is
only capable of supporting one video, one presentation or one
animation. OpenDoc eliminates this limitation and allows for
multiple moving parts per page per document. In the future,
information will take many forms and the OpenDoc architecture is
an attempt to bring the future to the industry...today.
</p>
<p>
Strategic Implications for WordPerfect
</p>
<p>
"Your most dangerous competitors are those that are most like
you." (Harvard Business Review, 1991)
</p>
<p>
The decision to write to the OpenDoc specification and design to
the compound document paradigm should not be taken lightly.
Defining WordPerfect's role in this arena should be a strategy
that includes corporate vision (both technology and market
vision) and product strategy. A strategy is the summation of the
following three elements:
</p>
<p>
Objectives (not product or technology related)<br />
Vision (product or technology focus)<br />
Message (the communication to the general public)
</p>
<p>
All strategies start with a list of objectives which one hopes to
accomplish. These objectives must be clear in meaning but may be
ambiguous when related to a product or technology. Examples of
objectives include: protect the existing installed base or
change the image of a company from a manufacturer to a
distributor. Notice neither objective focused on a specific
product or technology.
</p>
<p>
Product or technology focus takes place at the vision stage. A
vision provides an immediate road map of executables that need to
be accomplished to help meet the objectives. Examples of vision
statements include: refer to object technologies, focus on
company's strength in distribution, or focus on the competitors
weak development capabilities.
</p>
<p>
The message is the content used to communicate the vision and
objectives to the audience of choice. The message may or may not
contain parts of the objectives and vision, and deals with
perspective as reality.
</p>
<p>
By adopting the OpenDoc architecture, the following elements will
impact WordPerfect's tactical and strategic decisions in the
future:
</p>
<p>
OpenDoc alleviates dependency on Microsoft for compound document
structure for WordPerfect and the industry
</p>
<p>
Competitive and strategic advantage<br />
Aids in obsolescence<br />
Organizational structure must change
</p>
<p>
Alleviating One Source Dependency
</p>
<p>
By incorporating the OpenDoc architecture, the developer is
giving the end-user a choice of interoperable compound document
structures, thus relieving the one source dependency for future
technologies that worries many IS shops. WordPerfect, like many
ISVs, are held at the mercy of Microsoft for many operating
system services. By fully supporting the OpenDoc initiative,
WordPerfect will no longer be held captive to Microsoft and its
agenda of propagating its game plan.
</p>
<p>
Competitive and Strategic Advantage
</p>
<p>
As outlined above, the OpenDoc architecture provides the
developer, end-user with various competitive advantages both
tactical and strategic. Support for this architecture will
supply with WordPerfect with an overall corporate vision of the
future computing environment, and the technology that will make
it happen.
</p>
<p>
Aids in Obsolescence
</p>
<p>
Products become obsolete at an increasing rate in the technology
marketplace. Managing one’s product obsolescence is crucial to
the success of the product and the company. In the past,
Microsoft has excelled at this and is currently in the process of
doing it again with Windows, NT and Cairo. The theory is that in
an industry that has very short version life cycles (version 1.0
vs version 2.0), management of that version cycle and the
subsequent version cycle is crucial for the products success.
For example, WordPerfect for Windows 5.2 had a version cycle of
only 11 months. Management of the version, how and when to
discard it, as well as the management of the upgrade are issues
that don't just happen on a development schedule. The word
processor is expected to fade from prominence sometime in the
next three years. OLE 2.0 and Cairo will secure this prophecy
and enable Microsoft to manage the process.
</p>
<p>
In short, the OpenDoc technology helps WordPerfect make the word
processor obsolete. This technology allows WordPerfect to make
the decisions as to when an how we choose to change word
processing instead of playing by someone else's rules.
</p>
<p>
Organizational Structure
</p>
<p>
Technology will not drive cultural change.
</p>
<p>
As products become smaller and more modular, business models will
have to adjust. the typical business model of major software
vendors today is composed of an organization based on a product
model and dotted line to specific functions (marketing,
development, advertising, and PR). During the next five years,
the industry will see two compound document architectures evolve
(OpenDocs and OLE 2.0), two object-oriented operating systems
introduced (Cairo and PowerOpen), and the applications and
categories losing their tight definitions of today.
</p>
<p>
The business model of today enables the vendor to sell today's
technology as tomorrow's applications, all packaged in new shrink
wrap. Part of the problem during the 1980s was that the personal
computer revolution was so young that users had their hands full
learning <<CTR-ALT-DEL>> and other codes. The
market was so
young that there was not time for innovation...only time to
market. It simply would not be successful to employ a business
model that exploited innovation and forced the end users to
change and adjust constantly.
</p>
<p>
Business models of the future will be focused on delivering
functionality innovations and no simply propagating the current
product line. In fact, the current product lines will slowly
dissolve into functionality sets. The organization of the future
will no longer be organized around products but around functional
sets of technology. For example, every word processor has a
director of product marketing; tomorrow there will be a director
of document rendering.
</p>
<p>
This modular approach to the organization structure maps
exceedingly well to the inevitable market transformation. This
organizational structure is vastly different than the one that
exists today at WordPerfect and forces change upon many groups
and individuals. By adopting OpenDoc, WordPerfect must be aware
that organizational changes are on the horizon and a plan must be
initiated to manage the change ahead.
</p>
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
