I noticed this article on Slashdot (discussion here). I remember debating with John Bell about whether or not I would ever take a job at Microsoft. All feasibility aside, I’m not sure I really would. A lot of people make a living of demonizing Microsoft—I’m not a part of that crowd (I mean, what’s the eternal significance of monopolistic business practices anyway?), but I think from an ethical standpoint that there’s much about Microsoft to give one pause.
SunSpot.net: Software king builds young careers, too. Khan said he was recently notified by Microsoft that he was selected for one of the coveted internships this year. He will receive subsidized housing, a salary that Microsoft describes only as ‘competitive,’ access to the company social events and the same training available to full-time employees. Interns entering their senior year of college are also invited to an end-of-the-summer catered barbecue at the house of Bill Gates, chairman and co-founder of Microsoft.
On a related note, the Mozilla organization has posted a new page regarding the recent outbreak of new browser technologies.
Mozilla: Browser Innovation. In addition to the Mozilla-based browsers, Apple has recently launched its own browser for Mac OS X, known as Safari. It may be that the majority of Mac end users will end up using Safari because it comes with the OS, just as many people end up using IE because it comes with the Windows distribution. Some see this as traumatic or as a mark of doom. But the Mozilla project understands that almost everyone in the US market (and a substantial percentage of the international market) receives Internet Explorer when they acquire a computer, and our job is to provide an alternative. We would have preferred to have Apple use Gecko or collaborate with us on the development of the Camino browser, but providing an alternative to an OS-sponsored browser is nothing new to us. The key goal of the Mozilla project is to help keep content on the web open and help keep access to that content from being controlled by a single source. Apple’s decision to ship a browser based on an open source rendering engine, with a focus on standards compliance, is a good thing for the big picture goal.
The emphasis on the open content standards is mine.
A coworker had joked recently that if Microsoft had gone ahead and taken over the world that browser development would be much easier. Well, yes and no. It might be easier, but can you imagine an Internet based on proprietary standards where one organization—whose good, old-fashioned, capitalist goals are to sustain itself and widen profit margins—dictates the terms of the flow of information? I’m not knocking capitalism, but sometimes what’s best for the user and the industry has to be discussed in a marketplace of ideas, such as the W3C.
But, if this is the case, why are web pages rendered so awfully? Netscape and others would assert that this is actually because of Microsoft’s predatory practices: the very reason we have different browser renderings is because Microsoft a). packaged their browser with every operating system they’ve shipped since Windows 95 and b). that browser, through its iterations, has not followed the W3C rules. Speaking in terms of Adam Smith now, active browser competition would help browsers achieve better standards, just as better products out-do their competitors in the marketplace. But, Microsoft’s monopolistic practices allowed them to squash competition, thereby giving them the power to do whatever they wanted in terms of browser rendering.
That’s why there’s been little innovation since Internet Explorer 4. That’s why it’s a Bad Thing to let Microsoft—or any other one organization for that matter—to determine the means by which information flows. That’s why your web pages render differently.
It’s going to take some time before the market readjusts to a competitive landscape and, until then, we will have to deal with the shoddy implementations of W3C standards. With a little foresight and some patience, though, perhaps we’ll be able to see through the readjustment and design documents that are actually useful to future applications.
I don’t care what they wind up doing, so long as it makes for one browser to rule them all. I don’t care if Microsoft does squash the competition. I don’t care if Linux squashes the competition. It doesn’t matter at all, so long as there is no more of this mis-rendering crap going on (I can say crap right? this is a PG blog… that doesn’t suck
). For instance, I just implemented a “verse of the day ticker” on my blog, but it only renders correctly in IE, and it’s written in Javascript… which is supposed to be universal. Yeah, right. Untill they come up with one browser to rule them all, it won’t matter and will always cause designers and developers major headaches. Let’s just go back to old BBS’s. They were better anyway.
And if Microsoft offered me a job K, what do you think I would do? Seriously, they are just one of the most smartly run buisnesses ever. Not always run 100% morally, but unless one is CEO, that is not a reflection on the average employee. And bro, don’t take job offers lightly, I hope you never find out how difficult it can be to find one. Praise God that you do have a job
I think personal “dissention” to a company shouldn’t deter you from considering a job like that- it’s all about what God would have you do. And that may be working for MS. But untill that day would come, leave it as hypothetical. Otherwise it’ll just cause unnecessary debates that do nothing to build up the Body. I’m pretty sure Paul says to avoid these types of debates (I just forget where or in what words).
I’m rambling now. Sorry. I guess take what I say with some understanding of how my perspective is different because of my situation. That whole begining statement “I remember debating with John Bell about whether or not I would ever take a job at Microsoft” struck a nerve to me that would roll off most peoples’ backs.
The real solution to browser problems I think lies in complete server side control of browsing. I dunno how feasable that is, but it would fix alot.
-Jai out
Would I take a job at microsoft? No.
But, i’d rather take a job as a Burger Flipper. On the other side of things, most people would kill for a job at Microsoft. Hell, Most people would kill for a job int he tech industry period right now. I can’t speak for the rest of the country, but, it is absolutly miserable around here right now. “4 years of experience with such and such, management experience required … salary: 5.25$/hour”
its bad. I can’t think of a worse industry to be a part of right now. And MOST people, even educated CS students have never used anything besides Windows (except via telnet or ssh … ), so, its all they know and are more than willing to develop for them.
Its a very bad situation. Especially with how much they are closing off formats more and more. Whats going to happen when Office 2003 hits the streets with its new format? How long will it take for Open Office to catch up? Will they be able to?
However, over the past couple of years i’ve watched bad thing happen to this industry … gpg becomes a terrorist action, etc … I can’t condone software that can potential spy on people, enforce asinine laws, and generally restrict the flow of information. This isn’t saying i am against closed source products. Hackers gotta eat too. But, I want to be reasonably sure that it isn’t going to restrict my computer usage by using a piece of software.
As for one browser to rule them all: That is a very, very /bad/ idea. what we need is the browsers AND the developers to follow w3c guildlines 100%.
My favorite browser is Galeon. Why? because its fast and it supports tabs the way I want it too. And a browser without tab’d browsing is useless to me (I frequently have 30 or 40 web pages open at a time … grouped into 3 or 4 windows … with references/documentation/etc …)
Other people actually prefer MSIE for some unknonw-to-me reason. Even my coworkers use it, they agree mozilla is better and that they like it better, but still fire up IE cause it ‘feels better’ on windows.
Now. if you wanna go down the lines of “One rendering engine to rule them all” … and said rendering engine is Open Source, and this rendering engine can drop into any browser easily … then i’m all for that. Get gecko and konquer teams working with opera’s and such. Have it be released by w3c as the ‘official rendering engine of the web’ … but, it would have to be open for me to trust it.
Altp.
I have to agree with Altp. One browser ruling all seems to be the problem – that’s a summary of the whole paradigm of the Windows computing platform.
IE is total garbage. It’s a resource hog (I don’t agree with any person who says resources aren’t an issue anymore… the only people who say that either have one program open at any given time or do all their computing on an IBM Netfinity server with 50 Terabytes of RAM and 150 Petabytes of HDD space). IE is slow, it’s impractical, it contributes to bad web coding with it’s ‘IE-Only Code Promotion’.
Anyways, back to the original post Ken made, I’m not sure if I would work at M$. Granted, the Chairman is quite the… undesirable… person… but then again, we dislike him because we know so much about his high-profile personhood. How many of us who work for large corporations (I work at Fiserv) know our CEOs and whether or not they are moral people? Yet I still continue to work there… and our CEO is probably just as money-hungry and immoral as Mr. Gates.
There are ways to research your company’s business practices, and in turn the ethics of your company’s management. If you are willing to live with the information you gain.
Just google for it. Or look at the obvious activist groups relative to your industry.
Jai, I don’t mean to take job offers lightly—quite the opposite, in fact. It’s for that very reason that I have considered whether or not I would take such an opportunity.
One of the things that I held back in my blog was the various examples of pop culture that consider situational ethics in the corporate workplace: The Firm, Devil’s Advocate, Wall Street, and Changing Lanes to name a few. The reason I held back was because each of those examples articulate widely differing narratives: The Firm explores the corporate front of a mafia operation, Devil’s Advocate is a fantastical story where Al Pacino plays Beelzebub himself, Wall Street involves a monologue by Michael Douglas that connects corporate competition to Darwinism, Changing Lanes offers a glimpse into the power politics of huge corporate entities. Where these films do connect, though, is at the point of personal compromise. The characters portrayed by Tom Cruise, Keanu Reeves, Charlie Sheen, and Ben Affleck all compromise on a previously held sense of common ethics. These films provide a medium of self reflection. In other words, they prompt me to ask myself, “how far is Ken Walker willing to bend the rules?”
In the same way, a conversation about Microsoft provides a medium for the same reflection. Ryan raises a good point in that you’re going to turn up dirt on just about anyone you work for. I see business ethics come into the discussion on an almost daily basis in the workplace. The only hypothetical part of the discussion is that Microsoft hasn’t offered me a job.
You’re right in pointing out that pointless debates are a waste of everyone’s time and—perhaps more often than not—prideful and ungodly behavior, and I don’t want to prompt or participate in that. I do think, though, that it’s important—critically so—to consider the implications of aligning yourself with an organization whether it’s corporate, government or even non-profit. To do so is to ascribe to the culture that is perpetuated by the leadership. It’s a basic tenant of management that leading people involves every aspect of your professional behavior, and a culture of unethical behavior propagates throughout the organization.
Microsoft has been legally declared a monopoly who has abused their market standing to ruthlessly maintain that position. This isn’t conspiracy theory or fiction, it’s a reality. This puts them into the same category as Arthur Anderson, Worldcom, and Enron. They’ve committed criminal acts. The severity of those acts can be further debated, but the facts are there.
Now, understanding that this is easier for me to say because I already have a job, and that this is significantly easier because I don’t have such a job offer, and that it’s easier still because my choice will be the most popular of my readers (the vocal ones, anyway), I have to ask the question. If Microsoft dangled a huge carrot in front of me and my family, how far is Ken Walker willing to bend the rules?
Well spoken Ken. I think I see things on a much more perpendicular line than other people, so often I miss the parallels. You helped clear up what you meant, and now I think I agree with your angle. Of course, that doesn’t exactly make anything easier, but at least it’s clearer :/
-Jai
I think Ken has articulated the problem well. NO I would never take a job at Micro$oft…. But look here http://www.linuxworld.com/2003/0314.petreley.html
He says that Linux development share is cutting into the Windows development market space big time. This gives young CS students something to choose as an alternative. I wonder if his analysis is correct?