Microsoft is right to warn about the danger of a serious monopoly in search because of Google’s dominance. Its own revamped search engine, Bing, is a welcome addition and has some interesting features that should earn it more followers.
Maybe it is time to apply Microsoft’s enlightened approach to monopolies to what is happening in its own backyard where, amazingly, it still has almost 95 percent of the global market for PC operating systems (Windows), word processing (Word) and spreadsheets (Excel). Last year, a new generation of “netbooks” running the open-source Linux operating system seemed set to capture the bottom end of the market.
I bought a US$199 Asus, which I thought would be my dream machine as it weighed barely 1kg and came with the free OpenOffice.org word-processor, Linux operating system, Skype, educational and arts programs and Google documents.
It didn’t turn out so well: the screen was too small, wireless links flaky and poor battery life. But hell, the potential was there, so when Asus recently released its beautiful Eee Seashell with a bigger screen and six hours of battery life, I bought one on impulse.
The problem was that Asus had not only adopted Windows and jettisoned Linux (which I knew), but the computer didn’t even come with the free services that came with the US$199 model. I know there are millions who love Windows. That is their human right. But it fails completely — for me — on usability. So, the Seashell ends up not as a next-generation netbook, but as a Microsoft-occupied computer and all the simplicity of the earlier Asus machines has gone out of the Windows. Every time I open it, I am assailed with stuff I don’t want — Windows Live this, Norton that, Phishing this, Works that — with no obvious way of switching some of them off. When I simply wanted to write a note there was no Open Office and when I tried Word in Microsoft Works it kept asking me to sign up for another 45 days (or whatever) after inputting a key number I was supposed to have but didn’t.
How did this happen? There are various versions. One is that Microsoft suddenly woke up to a serious threat to its market share and became Microhard. It gave Asus a package it couldn’t refuse — a cheap version of Windows as long as it tossed the upstart Linux overboard. True or not, Asus has changed from being a successful proponent of Linux to an evangelist for Windows.
The second version is that Asus, seeking a cheap Web book to sell globally, used free Linux as a lever to force Microsoft to give it a cheap deal it wouldn’t otherwise have got.
A third version is that Linux wasn’t yet up to the job as there were so many different versions and users had difficulty linking with devices such as printers. This theory was given support when Wal-Mart dropped the Taiwanese US$199 Green gPC because of poor sales. But it doesn’t explain why the Linux Asus Eee PC was such a roaring success.
What cannot be denied is that there is a huge potential demand for cheap devices of this kind — not just for those wanting to simplify their lives but for the billions who don’t have a computer at all. Fortunately, help may be at hand, as there are numerous affordable models in the pipeline. Whether the successful ones will be Linux, Windows, Google’s Android, Symbian or even ARM remains to be seen.
I am told there is an impressive Web book running the Linux-based Ubuntu in the pipeline. Microsoft has already disproved the axiom of the great management guru Peter Drucker, who claimed that no non-governmental monopoly had ever lasted more than 15 years. The prospect of serious competition in operating systems can only be good not just for consumers all over the world but for Microsoft as well. But whether it can be dislodged from its entrenched position remains an open question.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS